Speaker 1: Let not your heart be troubled. You are listening to
Speaker 1: the Sean Hannity radio show podcast My Friends at My Pillow.
Speaker 1: My buddy Michael Lindell told me he was coming out
Speaker 1: with a brand new product. It's called the New Mattress Topper.
Speaker 1: So I got the New Mattress Topper immediately and I've
Speaker 1: been sleeping on it now for a couple of months.
Speaker 1: It's the best thing you've ever felt in your life.
Speaker 1: Now you literally have my pillow phone for support. It's
Speaker 1: a transitional phone that helps relieve pressure points. And it's
Speaker 1: ultra soft, patented temperature regulating cover, and I gotta tell
Speaker 1: you has a tenure warranty, a cover that's washable and dryable.
Speaker 1: It's made in the USA, backed by the sixty day
Speaker 1: unconditional money back guarantee. Once you try this new Mattress Topper,
Speaker 1: you put it right over your mattress, you will never
Speaker 1: sleep better. And right now, you my radio listeners, you're
Speaker 1: gonna say thirty percent off when you go to my
Speaker 1: pillow dot com and use the promo code Topper. And
Speaker 1: by the way, Mike will also give you two standard
Speaker 1: my pillows absolutely free. All right, So try my pillow
Speaker 1: dot Com promo code hopper, promo code topper for this
Speaker 1: great deal and the best night sleep you ever had. Alright,
Speaker 1: glad you with us right down our toll free telephone number.
Speaker 1: It's eight D one, Shawn. You want to be a
Speaker 1: part of the program. A lot of news to get
Speaker 1: to today. Thirty nine days to the mid term elections.
Speaker 1: The Republicans in the Senate have a fifty one forty
Speaker 1: nine majority, raizor raizor thin majority. Why have I been
Speaker 1: saying now for months, long before a lot of you
Speaker 1: were paying any attention to the mid term elections, that
Speaker 1: this is the most important mid term election in our lifetime.
Speaker 1: You know, there's only been three times in the last
Speaker 1: hundred years where after the party that wins the White
Speaker 1: House gets to win seats in in the House and
Speaker 1: said doesn't lose a whole bunch of seats. It's called
Speaker 1: the political ebb and flow and cycle of politics. And
Speaker 1: the lads time it happened was in and that's when
Speaker 1: right after nine eleven, Oh sorry, that was rather wait
Speaker 1: two thousand, I'm sorry, two thousand and three, after George Bush.
Speaker 1: That with George Bush was the last first his first term,
Speaker 1: the first mid term. Afterwards, I apologize. I'm reading ten
Speaker 1: things and watching four television sets and of five computers
Speaker 1: in front of me, and I'm a little a d
Speaker 1: d as I get started because news is breaking. It
Speaker 1: just doesn't happen. It's a hard thing to do. I've
Speaker 1: been telling you this long period of time for a reason.
Speaker 1: There's a lot at stake. There's nothing that I'm telling
Speaker 1: you about this election that is not true. The Democrats
Speaker 1: have said it. They want to impeach the president. Chuck
Speaker 1: Schumer can't do it soon enough. That's what they want.
Speaker 1: They want to undo the vote of they want to
Speaker 1: redo and bay sickly. That's what is turning out to be.
Speaker 1: And if Republicans lose control of the House, the Democrats
Speaker 1: under pressure from their base Maxine Waters who even admitted there,
Speaker 1: they keep telling me not to say it. We'll do it,
Speaker 1: We'll do it, but don't say it. What else do
Speaker 1: they want? Well, we've had people like Elizabeth Warren, Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi all saying they want their crumbs back. President gives
Speaker 1: the biggest tax cut in history. Average American families for
Speaker 1: the first time and what twenty years see real money
Speaker 1: in their pocket, real increase in their salary and their
Speaker 1: spending money, and they still want the crumbs back. We
Speaker 1: know they want. They they're not thinking about security and
Speaker 1: securing the borders. They don't pay attention to the opioid
Speaker 1: crisis and the drugs crossing our borders. They care about votes.
Speaker 1: They want open borders, and they don't even they want
Speaker 1: to eliminate. They want America to be a sanctuary country,
Speaker 1: like California is a sanctuary state, like we have sanctuary cities.
Speaker 1: They want to keep Obamacare that they're not open to
Speaker 1: creative solutions like Dr Josh Umber and Atlas m D
Speaker 1: and health care savings accounts and ways that you can
Speaker 1: protect pre existing conditions and ensure every American and even
Speaker 1: offer concierge care for every American for crying out loud
Speaker 1: like Dr Rumber does the fifty bucks a month. This
Speaker 1: is all in play in thirty nine days now. Why
Speaker 1: have I been talking about it so long? Because it's
Speaker 1: my job to tell you and prepare you for what's
Speaker 1: coming up next. And I've got to tell you something.
Speaker 1: What happened today does not surprise me. That's why in
Speaker 1: states like Florida, you've got your current governor Rick Scott
Speaker 1: going up against Bill Nelson. That race matters. Heidi high Camp,
Speaker 1: you know, has now joined Jeff Snowflake and Lisa Murkowski
Speaker 1: and Joe Mansion of West Virginia. And I'm gonna get
Speaker 1: into this. Let's delay this, let's give into the Democrats
Speaker 1: delay for another another week of FBI investigations. And I'm
Speaker 1: gonna tell you why this is really happening in just
Speaker 1: a second. But these races matter. Joe Donnelly is a
Speaker 1: no on Breck Kavanaugh. Why in Indiana, Claire mccaskell is
Speaker 1: a no on Judge Kavanaugh in Missouri. These are states
Speaker 1: that voted for Trump. In North Dakota, in Indiana, in Missouri,
Speaker 1: in West Virginia, in Florida. These are winnable states. We
Speaker 1: have the best economic progress this country is seen in
Speaker 1: two decades. We have more jobs created in the Lasked
Speaker 1: two years then at a record pace, four million Americans
Speaker 1: back to our four fewer, four million, fewer Americans on
Speaker 1: food stamps. I am just you know, it is, it
Speaker 1: is why it is so frustrating. We came one vote
Speaker 1: shy of a complete repeal of Obamacare. Senator McCain was
Speaker 1: the deciding vote there after promising the people of Arizona.
Speaker 1: By the way, I hope Martha McSally, I hope the
Speaker 1: people Arizona are paying attention to her campaign. She's an
Speaker 1: American hero, and I hope she gets elected. So anyway,
Speaker 1: so they what happened today is the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Speaker 1: They did vote to advanced Brick Cavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination
Speaker 1: to the full Senate, but not after a lot of
Speaker 1: theatrics and drama by Jeff Snowflake and then apparently that
Speaker 1: he then now joined by Lisa Murkowski, and he now
Speaker 1: joined she now joined by Joe Manchin. And you know,
Speaker 1: now it goes on. They want to well one week
Speaker 1: the delay. We don't want to. We're gonna advance it
Speaker 1: to the Senate, the full Senate, but we want to
Speaker 1: see what happens. So I guess at this point, unless
Speaker 1: other people come out, then it's gonna be another week.
Speaker 1: And what they're asking for is that the Senate have
Speaker 1: an FBI investigation. Now, let me go through in detail
Speaker 1: why this is absolutely a bogus move on their part.
Speaker 1: It's just important facts matter in particular cases here. Now
Speaker 1: you gotta remember, if you review the charges of Professor
Speaker 1: Ford or allegations were made back in July. Now we
Speaker 1: need one more week. Why so another fifteen people can
Speaker 1: be brought up by Democratic operatives? Is Senator Feinstein getting
Speaker 1: attorneys for somebody else lusten not telling us about it?
Speaker 1: The way, when she met with Judge Kavanaugh, she had
Speaker 1: privately been offering help to get a radical attorney who,
Speaker 1: by the way, didn't believe Paula Jones would think Paula
Speaker 1: Jones having Bill Clinton exposing himself to her and saying
Speaker 1: kiss it. She didn't think that was a big deal,
Speaker 1: but she did support al Frankin. And now in this
Speaker 1: particular case, Diane Feinstein recommends we find out they don't
Speaker 1: tell Judge Kavanaugh that this is all going on as
Speaker 1: the meeting in private, or they have the hearing, so
Speaker 1: they they literally hold it from July. In the case
Speaker 1: of Professor Ford, I've said from the beginning she deserved
Speaker 1: to be heard because these allegations are so serious. She's
Speaker 1: been heard, and she doesn't remember a date, she doesn't
Speaker 1: remember a day of the week, she doesn't remember a location,
Speaker 1: she doesn't remember how she got to her from a
Speaker 1: party where the alleged crime took place. She did mention
Speaker 1: four witnesses that were there, one in particular Mark Judge,
Speaker 1: that was actually in the room, and all four witnesses
Speaker 1: now have the Senate when they found out the names
Speaker 1: of people, they went and they did their due diligence,
Speaker 1: they did an investigation, and all four witnesses that Ford
Speaker 1: listed have given sworn statements under the penalty of felony.
Speaker 1: Let me repeat, all witnesses from thirty six years ago
Speaker 1: have given sworn statements under the penalty of a felony
Speaker 1: to the entire Senate Judiciary Committee. That includes Professor Ford's friend, uh,
Speaker 1: a woman named Leyland Kaiser, and she doesn't have any
Speaker 1: recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where
Speaker 1: Brett Cavanaugh was present. Mark Judges said repeated he doesn't know.
Speaker 1: Now the problem as we go forward here, as they
Speaker 1: keep saying about the FBI, the FBI, the FBI, the
Speaker 1: problem with that argument is, all right, so the FBI
Speaker 1: now is going to spend a week doing what we
Speaker 1: don't know what house to go look at. You know,
Speaker 1: I do watch forensic files. I think it's an amazing
Speaker 1: show in the sense that you know, you can go
Speaker 1: back and they have the FBI old cold case files
Speaker 1: that they have and they reopen them sometimes thirty years later,
Speaker 1: and they're able to pull out evidence. And with new
Speaker 1: technology and and DNA and everything else that they've able
Speaker 1: to now use the tools of forensics, it's amazing what
Speaker 1: they can do. We don't know where they could go.
Speaker 1: So the only thing that the FBI is going to
Speaker 1: be able to do is interview all the witnesses that
Speaker 1: are for ready gone on record and given statements under
Speaker 1: the threat of a felony. And the only hope, I
Speaker 1: guess is is that one of them will admit they
Speaker 1: committed a felony then and change their opinion. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: I didn't mean that, or I just remember differently from
Speaker 1: thirty six years ago. It just came to me, you know,
Speaker 1: two days ago. Um, this is about a delay. You
Speaker 1: want to start a pool about how many people maybe
Speaker 1: the Democrats have sitting in the wings because they've thrown
Speaker 1: everything else out there. I mean, we had the allegation
Speaker 1: of Ms. Ramirez and this was a claim. Debora Ramirez
Speaker 1: is a name the New Yorker. I don't think they
Speaker 1: ever should have published. It was pretty flimsy reporting, and
Speaker 1: that Kavanaugh exposed himself as a freshman at Yale, and
Speaker 1: but she did say in the article that she was
Speaker 1: quickly inebriated at the party at different points she wasn't
Speaker 1: even sure Cavanat Kavanaugh was the perpetrator. She said she
Speaker 1: was foggy, slurring her words, acknowledge she had significant memory
Speaker 1: gaps from the Evening and The New York Times had
Speaker 1: interviewed several dozen that means at least thirty six forty
Speaker 1: eight people in the course of a week and an
Speaker 1: attempt to corroborate Mr Ramirez his story. They couldn't find
Speaker 1: one person with firsthand knowl and risk. Mrs Ramirez her
Speaker 1: self contacted former Yale classmates, The New York Times reported,
Speaker 1: and was asking them if they could recall the incident,
Speaker 1: telling some of them she couldn't be certain. It's Mr
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh the one who exposed himself, and he is his
Speaker 1: family had to live through and endure that, and then
Speaker 1: endure that he was on a boat in Rhode Island
Speaker 1: and then indoor an incident in Colorado which were all
Speaker 1: the bunk very quickly, and then endure the the outrageous
Speaker 1: charges of Julie sweat Nick, his ex boyfriend says what
Speaker 1: she's saying is not true at all, and claiming that
Speaker 1: four decades ago that when they were in high school,
Speaker 1: and well she was in college, but when Brett Cavanaugh
Speaker 1: was in high school, they had she attended ten parties
Speaker 1: and they had these gang train rape parties, and that
Speaker 1: girls were being drugged and in toxic forced to be intoxicated,
Speaker 1: and boys lining the hall waiting their turn, and nobody
Speaker 1: had ever said a thing there. I don't know if
Speaker 1: the FBI is gonna investigate that too. And although you know,
Speaker 1: Jeff Snowflake says, well, it's gonna be we'll see, you know,
Speaker 1: it's only gonna be limited in scope. We'll see how
Speaker 1: limited in scope it ends up being. That's why this
Speaker 1: election is important. They have done everything they can do
Speaker 1: to undo what you the American people want everything, lying
Speaker 1: about a Russian dossier, hookers urinating on a bed and
Speaker 1: spreading that information to steal an election before the election,
Speaker 1: then spreading that information to cause a special counsel to
Speaker 1: be appointed, not knowing that ever be exposed. Thanks to
Speaker 1: the show and many people that we have on this show,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna get into all this. This is the end
Speaker 1: of due process in America. I'm telling you right now,
Speaker 1: it's going to be going forward guilt by accusation because
Speaker 1: that's all we've got. It's never gonna go back to
Speaker 1: presumption of innocence anymore because you reward this behavior, these smears,
Speaker 1: the lying, the slander, the besmirchment, the character assassination. They're
Speaker 1: gonna do it again and again and again. And if
Speaker 1: you think the predictable, every two or four years, racist, sexist, homophobics, emophobic,
Speaker 1: is homophobic, dirty air water, killed children, and throw granny
Speaker 1: over the cliff. You think that's bad. What you've watched
Speaker 1: and witnessed in the last twelve thirteen days is just
Speaker 1: the tip of the iceberg. It'll get more outrageous and
Speaker 1: more innocent people's lives will be round. You think all
Speaker 1: those allegations that have come out against Judge Kavanaugh true
Speaker 1: thirty nine days. They're hoping you stay home. You gotta
Speaker 1: stay home. You'll get the government you deserve. With only
Speaker 1: a kite, a house key, and wet hempstring. Benjamin Franklin
Speaker 1: captured lightning in a bottle over two d and sixty
Speaker 1: years later, with a little resourcefulness, ingenuity, and grit, We're
Speaker 1: not only capturing energy from the sun and wind, we're
Speaker 1: storing it, ensuring Americans have the energy they need whenever
Speaker 1: they need it. Learn more about the nation's leader and
Speaker 1: energy storage at next Era energy dot com. So the FBI,
Speaker 1: and I'll play it again in the next half hour.
Speaker 1: The FBI doesn't make conclusions, they don't make recommendations. And
Speaker 1: an FBI investigation, what are they going to investigate. They're
Speaker 1: gonna go back and they're going to do what has
Speaker 1: already been done by the Senate Committee, and that is
Speaker 1: that they're going to talk to the four witnesses that
Speaker 1: Professor Ford listed to corroborate her claims and what she
Speaker 1: was alleging. They all made sworn statements under the penalty
Speaker 1: of perjury, I'm sorry, felony. Rather that includes everybody there,
Speaker 1: including an eyewitness that was in the room. Mark Judge,
Speaker 1: you know, if your review everything she claims from thirty
Speaker 1: six years ago, there there is nothing new unless somebody
Speaker 1: wants to admit that they committed a felony. That is
Speaker 1: the only way possible that something can change with the
Speaker 1: one week pause. And that is what is infuriating to me,
Speaker 1: and everybody knows it and if this all stands and
Speaker 1: the Democrats do it, I suspect you're gonna be hearing
Speaker 1: a lot more next week. Just put your money down
Speaker 1: on it, and they get to now make more accusations.
Speaker 1: We need more weeks, and then it's all guilt by accusation,
Speaker 1: no presumption of innocence or due process. It's dead. I
Speaker 1: have been speaking with a number of people on the
Speaker 1: other side. We have conversations ongoing for a while with
Speaker 1: regard to UM making sure that we do due diligence here,
Speaker 1: and I think it would be UH proper to delay
Speaker 1: the floor vote for up to but not more than
Speaker 1: one week in order to let the fbi UM continue
Speaker 1: to do an investigation limited in time and scope to
Speaker 1: the current allegations that are there, and limited time to
Speaker 1: know more than one week. And I will vote to
Speaker 1: advance the bill UH to the floor with that understanding.
Speaker 1: And I've spoken to a few other members UM who
Speaker 1: on my side of the aisle that may be supportive
Speaker 1: as well. But that's my position. I think that that
Speaker 1: we we ought to do what we can to make
Speaker 1: sure that that we do all due diligence with an
Speaker 1: nomination is important, and I want to say that this
Speaker 1: committee has acted properly and the chairman has been over
Speaker 1: backwards to do investigations from this committee, and to delay
Speaker 1: this vote in this committee for a week so that
Speaker 1: Judge or that uh, that this Ford Dr Ford could
Speaker 1: be heard, and she was yesterday. So so that's with
Speaker 1: that agreement, I will vote to advanced bill to the floor.
Speaker 1: I don't know if this is going to continue one
Speaker 1: word or are we going to get a vote? But
Speaker 1: again I'm I'm here, so I'm not out there watching
Speaker 1: because I can't be out of great respect. Although maybe
Speaker 1: we'll go watchgether. Okay, we'll watch together. But I think
Speaker 1: it will work out very well for the country. I
Speaker 1: just wanted to work out well for the country. If
Speaker 1: that happens, I'm happy. Have you thought it all about
Speaker 1: the work placement for Judge? Not even a little bit,
Speaker 1: not even a little bit. What's your message forecasting call?
Speaker 1: I have no message. I mean, they have to do
Speaker 1: what they think is right, but there's no message whatsoever.
Speaker 1: They have to do what they think is right. They
Speaker 1: have to be comfortable with themselves, and I'm sure that's
Speaker 1: what they are. I'm going to rely on, uh, all
Speaker 1: of the people including Senator grass Lee, who's doing a
Speaker 1: very good job. That'll be a decision that they're going
Speaker 1: to make, and they suspect they'll be making some decision soon,
Speaker 1: whether to take a vote or to do whatever else
Speaker 1: they want to do. I will be totally reliant on
Speaker 1: what Senator Grassley and the group decides to do. We're
Speaker 1: gonna talk about Venezuela apps, I was waiting for that question.
Speaker 1: We will be discussing Venezuela, among many other things. Right.
Speaker 1: That was the President responding to events from earlier today,
Speaker 1: Jeff Flake out of nowhere after saying that he would
Speaker 1: support and they did advance in the Senate Judiciary Committee
Speaker 1: along a party line vote UH to send the nomination
Speaker 1: of Judge Kavan onto the full Senate. But as you heard,
Speaker 1: Jeff Flake has said, well, I'm doing it, but I
Speaker 1: want this, and that's not how it works. It's gonna
Speaker 1: be Mitch McConnell who ultimately decides whether or not there's
Speaker 1: gonna be a one week FBI investigation. But I just
Speaker 1: want to step back from the process here and just
Speaker 1: remind you reviewing the charges of Professor Ford he made
Speaker 1: in July, of course early July and then later July
Speaker 1: to Diane Feinstein dating back thirty six years and I've said,
Speaker 1: and everybody else I thinks has wanted Professor Ford to
Speaker 1: be heard because the allegations are so serious, and she was.
Speaker 1: And we heard from Judge Kavanaugh also yesterday in the
Speaker 1: case of just to recap that there are a lot
Speaker 1: of issues as it relates to well, Professor Ford didn't
Speaker 1: remember where the incident happened. We know that she didn't
Speaker 1: remember a day to day of the week, a location,
Speaker 1: how she got to her from the party um that
Speaker 1: had taken the alleged crime had taken place. She had
Speaker 1: mentioned four names, all four witnesses listed that were to
Speaker 1: corroborate her claims deny what she was alleging from thirty
Speaker 1: six years ago. All four people and sworn statements under
Speaker 1: the penalty of felony. Under the penalty of felony have
Speaker 1: put their statements down. Mark Judge is in the room
Speaker 1: and has no recollection of any such thing like this
Speaker 1: ever happening. And one of Professor Ford's best friends has
Speaker 1: said simply put Leland Kaiser lawyer put out a statement
Speaker 1: she does not know. Mr Kavanaugh has no recollection of
Speaker 1: ever being at a party or at a gathering where
Speaker 1: he was present with or without Dr. Ford. So now
Speaker 1: we have joining Jeff Flake. Then we have Lisa Murkowski
Speaker 1: of Alaska, Joe Mantion of West Virginia. Joe Mantion has
Speaker 1: a big Heidi High camp. I think is also undecided
Speaker 1: in this Joe Donnelly is a no against Kavanaugh. In Indiana.
Speaker 1: We have an election in thirty nine days. And as
Speaker 1: I have been pointing out here, where is the evidence
Speaker 1: in this case? And as why Look, this was the
Speaker 1: big talking point in the hearings yesterday. Demand an FBI investigation,
Speaker 1: Demand and FBI investigation. We heard the same talking points
Speaker 1: all morning long as they they moved the vote to
Speaker 1: one thirty Eastern today, Demand an FBI investigation. Well, an
Speaker 1: FBI investigation doesn't make any conclusion whatsoever, offers no recommendations whatsoever.
Speaker 1: The FBI has already said there's no crime in this
Speaker 1: particular case. They have they have no jurisdiction of any
Speaker 1: criminal investigation or activity in this case at all. The
Speaker 1: only thing once, because remember this was withheld since July
Speaker 1: by the Democrats who are playing politics, This is exactly
Speaker 1: what they're hoping they can stretch this out, somehow get
Speaker 1: over the finish line of election day, and somehow then
Speaker 1: stop the president's nominee. That's all this has ever been
Speaker 1: about for the Democrats. And you would think after all
Speaker 1: the years being in the Senate, people like Jeff Snowflake,
Speaker 1: who just hates the president. I'm not questioning his motivation,
Speaker 1: but I mean, it's just back and forth and back
Speaker 1: and forth. I think there was sentman is real and
Speaker 1: the hatred is real towards Donald Trump Lisa Murkowski anyway,
Speaker 1: But the FBI investigation makes no conclusions or recommendation. So
Speaker 1: what does that mean. The only thing that they can
Speaker 1: do is go back to the four witnesses that Professor
Speaker 1: Ford mentioned that have all given Sworn's statements under the
Speaker 1: threat of of felony, and in that sense, now we're
Speaker 1: back to where we have been in the very beginning.
Speaker 1: Now they say that it's gonna be limited in scope.
Speaker 1: Do any of you believe that. I do not believe
Speaker 1: this is gonna be limited in scope. I think the
Speaker 1: probability that some bomb is gonna drop today, Tomorrow, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday,
Speaker 1: whatever is very high because we've seen how far they'll
Speaker 1: go in this process. Talking about a case in Rhode Island, Oh, Newport, Well,
Speaker 1: Judge Kavanaugh has never been to Newport in his life. Loops,
Speaker 1: let's get rid of that one. In a case in Colorado, Whoops,
Speaker 1: that didn't work out either, an anonymous source writing Senator
Speaker 1: Corey Gardener's office, you don't think there's a ton if
Speaker 1: this is so politically charged the environment in the country
Speaker 1: that there are people writing stories right now to their senators.
Speaker 1: I need this investigated about Judge Kavanaugh, you know. Then
Speaker 1: The New Yorker came out with the case of Deborah
Speaker 1: Ramirez and she alleged that and Kavanaugh exposed himself at
Speaker 1: a drunken college party when he was a freshman at Yale.
Speaker 1: Then in her piece, she admitted she wasn't totally sure
Speaker 1: she was that he was the perpetrator, and it took
Speaker 1: six days to make that confirmation in her own mind,
Speaker 1: and she was quickly inebriated at the party. Those are
Speaker 1: her words, not mine, she tells The New Yorker. She
Speaker 1: was foggy and slurring her words, acknowledging she has significant
Speaker 1: memory gaps. From the evening, The New York Time Times
Speaker 1: interviewed several dozen people. That's what fifty people, thirty six
Speaker 1: people over the past week, and an attempt to corroborate
Speaker 1: Mr Ramire is a story. They couldn't find any one
Speaker 1: person with firsthand knowledge, and we do know the New
Speaker 1: York Times hates Donald Trump. Mr Ramirez herself was contacting
Speaker 1: former Yale classmates asking if they were called the incident,
Speaker 1: telling some of them, according to The New York Times,
Speaker 1: that she could not be certain Mr Kavanaugh was the
Speaker 1: one who exposed himself. And of course then we got
Speaker 1: I think one of the worst ones of all, and
Speaker 1: this was the case of Julie sweat Nick being represented
Speaker 1: by the attorney of the year, loved by the mainstream media,
Speaker 1: Michael Avinadi, Stormy Daniel's lawyer. Anyway, it turns out that
Speaker 1: in that particular case, those allegations were so over the top.
Speaker 1: In that case, she was alleging that over a two
Speaker 1: year period, they were almost weekly weekend party she went
Speaker 1: to ten of them, and that at these parties that
Speaker 1: boys in high school she was in college would be
Speaker 1: drugging girls, incapacitating them, getting them so inebriated that they
Speaker 1: couldn't function, and that they were going they were being
Speaker 1: gang raped and trained raped on a regular basis, describing
Speaker 1: boys lined up waiting their turn to rape girls that
Speaker 1: had been drugged. Now, if that had happened no more,
Speaker 1: it's a fair question. Why would any smart person ever
Speaker 1: go back to any party like that over ten parties
Speaker 1: over a two year period where it was routine and
Speaker 1: a gang rapes were taking place, and not one person
Speaker 1: ever told. A teacher, never told, the parent, never went
Speaker 1: to the police, and it just continued to happen over
Speaker 1: long periods of time, and that the defense and then
Speaker 1: eventually you she claims she got gang raped, what not?
Speaker 1: She didn't say Kavanaugh did that, but that was that
Speaker 1: story seems to have died down now too for some reason.
Speaker 1: Why do I suspect it's going to be resurrected in
Speaker 1: the days to come as this there's nothing new that
Speaker 1: they can find, They have no location, they can't go
Speaker 1: back and bringing the greatest forensic experts, it wouldn't be
Speaker 1: any because we don't know where it happened. So what
Speaker 1: are their options? What does the FBI have as options
Speaker 1: to again interview the four people that were already interviewed
Speaker 1: by the Senate Investigatory Committee Now The AP is now
Speaker 1: reporting that kavanaugh friend Mark Judge says he will gladly
Speaker 1: cooperate with any law enforcement agency that investigates confidentially. We
Speaker 1: have a Republican senator corner now saying that the Senate
Speaker 1: will have a vote to consider the motion to proceed
Speaker 1: with the Supreme Court nomination on Saturday, So we'll find
Speaker 1: out what that's all about. There's deeper principles in play
Speaker 1: here that we have got to pay very close attention to.
Speaker 1: Well beyond you know, we cannot have guilt by accusation
Speaker 1: in this country. There are very profound principles at stake here.
Speaker 1: I have talked about the the predictable strategies that Democrats
Speaker 1: use every two and four years. Smears, lies, slander. They
Speaker 1: bludge in Republicans as racist, sexist, islamophobic, homophobic, misogynistic, xenophobic.
Speaker 1: They don't agree with their environmental policy, so they want
Speaker 1: dirty air and water, they want children to die, and
Speaker 1: they want to throw granny over the cliff. Hannity, you're
Speaker 1: repeating yourself again because it's wrong. It is a predictable strategy.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, it's their go to strategy
Speaker 1: every two and four years. Slander is what they do.
Speaker 1: The Democratic Party is now the party of slander, character assassination,
Speaker 1: and smears and besmirchment. And they don't give a rip
Speaker 1: as long as they win elections. Oh Mitt Romney doesn't
Speaker 1: like women as their resumes and binders. Oh Mitt Romney
Speaker 1: didn't pay for taxes for ten years, and then you
Speaker 1: find out after the election he actually did. Oh good,
Speaker 1: we want who cares? We've watched so many instances in
Speaker 1: cases the same thing. Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas. Where is
Speaker 1: the presumption of innocence here? Where is due process in
Speaker 1: all of this? Where is a constitutional system of law
Speaker 1: and order in this? In any of this? How about
Speaker 1: all the other cases where the media has been wrong.
Speaker 1: They hate Sean Hannity, But Sean Hannity was right about
Speaker 1: Richard Jewell. I didn't rush to judgment and think, oh
Speaker 1: I fit the profile the lone bomber. I was right
Speaker 1: about Duke Lacrosse when so many others were dead wrong.
Speaker 1: And I went and actually did my reporting and met
Speaker 1: the families and firsthand and asked questions. They were wrong
Speaker 1: on Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. Obama was wrong. I
Speaker 1: actually took my time to my own reporting, went down
Speaker 1: and talked to George Zimmerman. How many other reporters do
Speaker 1: this just like we went We actually talked to Wiki Leaks,
Speaker 1: Juliana Sange. We tried to do our own reporting on
Speaker 1: this show. Or what about Ferguson Missouri, Darren Wilson guilty,
Speaker 1: Freddie Gray murdered by cops in Baltimore, and everybody in
Speaker 1: the meantime? Then those are only high profile cases. And then,
Speaker 1: of course the worst of all is the dirty dossier.
Speaker 1: Boughton paid for by Hillary Donald Trump. You know, rented
Speaker 1: a room in Moscow and head Hooker's urinating in the bed,
Speaker 1: the filing, the bed that Obama's, the Obamas slept in.
Speaker 1: That's in the dossier, and that was fed to every
Speaker 1: American before the election as a lie to help Hillary
Speaker 1: and after the election to destroy Trump. Our country is
Speaker 1: witnessing your living through the ugliest smear campaign in history.
Speaker 1: If we don't get this right, there will be no
Speaker 1: good people that will ever want to serve their country
Speaker 1: for decades to come. Democrats are now the party of
Speaker 1: no due process, no presumption of innocence, no constitution. What
Speaker 1: name one Democrat? That has given the presumption of innocence
Speaker 1: here because it's politics. You talked about drinking and sexual exploits,
Speaker 1: did you not, Senata? Let me let me take a
Speaker 1: step back and explain. Uh, high school, I was number
Speaker 1: one in the class, and I thought, no, no, no, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: got this up. I'm gonna I'm gonna talk about my No, no,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have to answer. I'm gonna talk about my
Speaker 1: high school record. If you're gonna sit here and mock me,
Speaker 1: we we were. I think we were all very fair
Speaker 1: to Dr Ford. Shouldn't we be just as fair to
Speaker 1: Judge Kebath as the federal judge? You're aware of the
Speaker 1: jury instruction falsest in in universe, falsest anomalous? Are you
Speaker 1: not false in one thing? False and everything? The core
Speaker 1: of why we're here today really is credibility. Judge, do
Speaker 1: you do you believe a need a health or Senator Craiball.
Speaker 1: You were both questioned about your record. The only difference
Speaker 1: is that you have been accused of sexual assault. How
Speaker 1: do you reconcile your statement about a conspiracy against you
Speaker 1: with the treatment of someone who was before this body
Speaker 1: not very long ago? Okay, um, and then do you
Speaker 1: agree that it is possible for men to both be
Speaker 1: friends with some women and treat other women badly? Um, sir,
Speaker 1: you also said that this past two weeks. This past
Speaker 1: two weeks has been a two week effort calculated and
Speaker 1: orchestrated as a political hit. Are you saying that Dr
Speaker 1: Ford's efforts to come forward to prepare for the very
Speaker 1: difficult testimony she gave today, to travel to Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: And tell us about her experience have all been part
Speaker 1: of an orchestrated political hit. And are you basically calling
Speaker 1: her some kind of political operative. I have found your
Speaker 1: testimony powerful, incredible, and I believe you your teacher, correct
Speaker 1: correct or. You have given America an amazing teaching moment.
Speaker 1: And you may have other moments in the classroom, but
Speaker 1: you have inspired and you have enlightened America. By my
Speaker 1: colleagues who have thank you for coming forward today, and
Speaker 1: I and we all admire you for what you're doing.
Speaker 1: And I understand why you have come forward. You wanted
Speaker 1: us and the American people to know what you knew
Speaker 1: about the character, the character of the man we are
Speaker 1: considering for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. I
Speaker 1: want to use a different word for your courage, um,
Speaker 1: because this is more as much as this hearing is
Speaker 1: about a Supreme Court justice, the reality is is by
Speaker 1: you coming forward your courage, you are affecting the culture
Speaker 1: of our country, afford. I want to begin by thanking
Speaker 1: you for coming to testify in front of us today.
Speaker 1: This is a public service, and I want you know
Speaker 1: that I'm grateful to have the opportunity to hear from
Speaker 1: you directly today. There are millions of victims and survivors
Speaker 1: out there who have been inspired by your courage. I
Speaker 1: am bravery is contagious. Indeed, that's a driving force behind
Speaker 1: the Me Too movement, and you sharing your story is
Speaker 1: going to have a lasting positive impact and so many
Speaker 1: survivors in our country. We owe you a dead and
Speaker 1: gratitude for that. Doctor. As difficult as this experience must be,
Speaker 1: an hour to Sean Hannady show right down on toll
Speaker 1: free telephone numbers eight hundred ninth one sewn uh now
Speaker 1: at the bottom of this half hour, before we got
Speaker 1: into all the flake drauma from earlier today and name
Speaker 1: calling and agreeing with the Democrats for an FBI one
Speaker 1: week limited investigation, and how many more accusations are going
Speaker 1: to be made in a week. Anybody want to start
Speaker 1: a a pool on you know how many Michael Lavanati
Speaker 1: himself can make in a week. Anyway, So joining us
Speaker 1: now we to get into all this. Kaylee mcinanny is
Speaker 1: with us, the author of the New American Revolution, the
Speaker 1: making of a Populace Movement. D C. McAllister is with us,
Speaker 1: author of Spygate, calumnist for p J Media. Uh and
Speaker 1: also by the way, uh d C went to u
Speaker 1: n C with Dr Ford uh and has talked publicly
Speaker 1: how she herself has been a victim of rape. Uh.
Speaker 1: David shown is a civil liberties attorney, criminal rights attorney.
Speaker 1: Uh d C. Let me begin with you. We watched this.
Speaker 1: Now we do know that all four witnesses that Professor
Speaker 1: Ford had mentioned of all given sworn statements under the
Speaker 1: threat of felony. And yet that doesn't seem to want
Speaker 1: to stop the Democrats from having it another investigation, even
Speaker 1: though Joe Biden says that it would be non conclusive,
Speaker 1: and of course uh they make no record mendations at
Speaker 1: the end of it. To me, it just seems like
Speaker 1: that just opens up another week for more crazy allegations
Speaker 1: to keep coming out. What do you think that this
Speaker 1: is a delay tactic. They didn't even say when this
Speaker 1: week begins. And there's a little technicality that I wonder
Speaker 1: about when when this is actually going to start and
Speaker 1: how long it's going to take, as far as that
Speaker 1: kind of delay goes. But they've already decided that Kavana
Speaker 1: is guilty. That's one of the things that really bothers
Speaker 1: me about this whole situation is the presumption of guilt
Speaker 1: with this man. When these Democrats look at this woman
Speaker 1: and say, I believe you because you're emotional um in
Speaker 1: this hearing, you know, I want to say, you know
Speaker 1: what's happened to our country? And if you cannot measure
Speaker 1: truth by someone's emotion, and you know she hasn't corroborated,
Speaker 1: and if you do want to bring emotions into it
Speaker 1: and have it as a factor. Actually, as a rape
Speaker 1: survivor myself, I wasn't convinced by her emotions. She didn't
Speaker 1: respond and didn't act to me like someone who had
Speaker 1: been set actually assaulted and was just now bringing it
Speaker 1: up in the face of the man who did it.
Speaker 1: But is it like someone who exactly like someone who
Speaker 1: was very nervous, but not yea filled with anger that
Speaker 1: you usually feel when this kind of thing happens to you. Look, obviously,
Speaker 1: I've never been through something as traumatic and horrible as that.
Speaker 1: I know that for example, if somebody dies, you know,
Speaker 1: you look at one corner of the room and people
Speaker 1: are laughing, another corner of the room people are crying,
Speaker 1: and and then people are mooting back and forth at
Speaker 1: different times. I mean, I don't know if there is
Speaker 1: one way that somebody's going to react to something like this.
Speaker 1: I I did feel with with with Judge Kavanaugh. I mean,
Speaker 1: the outrage of being wrongly accused seemed natural to me,
Speaker 1: although the Democrats, you know, commentators are trying to portray
Speaker 1: that is he's unhinged. I'm like, uh, you haven't been
Speaker 1: accused of gang rape, you haven't been accused of horrific
Speaker 1: things against women. And if you are innocent, remember Trey
Speaker 1: Goudy once famously, you know, act like you're innocent. Well,
Speaker 1: that's how I would act if I was innocent. I'd
Speaker 1: want to shout out from the root rooftops. But I
Speaker 1: you know, I can't put myself in anybody shoes. It
Speaker 1: just I know the horror. To me, that's evil. What
Speaker 1: we're describing is people that do that are evil. Um,
Speaker 1: let me bring in. Uh Kaylee mcinnanny is with us. Kelly,
Speaker 1: what are your thoughts on all of the comings and
Speaker 1: goings today. Yeah, it's really interesting because, as the Justice
Speaker 1: Kavan also accurately said, advice and consent has now been
Speaker 1: turned to search and destroy. And if this does not
Speaker 1: move forward, if we do not have a vote, if
Speaker 1: Judge Kavanaugh is not confirmed, the Democrats have won their
Speaker 1: political manipulation, their search and destroyed tactics. And it is horrific,
Speaker 1: Sean horrific that now the standard that is set that
Speaker 1: someone can come forward with not just uncorroborated stories, not
Speaker 1: just no evidence, but refuted stories. In this case, every
Speaker 1: person who has prepared only a witness denies it, but
Speaker 1: refuted stories can take down a judicial nominee. That's very scary.
Speaker 1: I do not doubt that something happened to miss Board,
Speaker 1: but it was not Brett Kavanaugh. And to see him
Speaker 1: goes down for something he did not do is a
Speaker 1: travesty and it is a bad standard to set in
Speaker 1: this country. What is your take, David shown I know
Speaker 1: you've you've worked on a lot of cases in your life,
Speaker 1: and you know a lot about human nature and people.
Speaker 1: And to me, just from a legal standpoint, if the
Speaker 1: FBI is not gonna give a recommendation or offer a conclusion,
Speaker 1: and the four people that were offered as having been
Speaker 1: witnesses to the alleged incident of all given sworn statements
Speaker 1: under the threat of felony, you know, and we don't
Speaker 1: even know the location of where there's occurred. It's not
Speaker 1: like we can go back and say, Okay, well we
Speaker 1: have new forensic techniques, maybe we can find some evidence
Speaker 1: of this or that. I mean, and I'm not being
Speaker 1: flippant here, it seems what could what could possibly change?
Speaker 1: I don't know what could unless somebody says I lied,
Speaker 1: uh and I committed a felony. You have the idea
Speaker 1: that the fb investigations some kind of tendency here is
Speaker 1: an absolute red herring. Um. I don't know where Proficial
Speaker 1: der Switz is coming from on that or any of
Speaker 1: these folks. Everybody knows. As the judge said, it doesn't
Speaker 1: come to any conclusion. But beyond that, there's nothing more
Speaker 1: they could do. This is just a matter of providing
Speaker 1: cover to Senator Flake and others that in the first
Speaker 1: case I ever had in practice was a false stifization
Speaker 1: of rape against the client. To see that client change
Speaker 1: when he finally was acquitted from the accusation until the
Speaker 1: acquittal is just phenomenal. I'm a little more cynical than DC. Frankly, Um,
Speaker 1: I'm concerned that people have already come to an inclusion
Speaker 1: of guilty beforehand, but I don't really think they care.
Speaker 1: I think that whether he's guilty or not guilty is
Speaker 1: just about irrelevant to many members of the committee. It's
Speaker 1: a talking point, it's an agenda. It suits their agenda.
Speaker 1: There's no fair person that could see that yesterday and
Speaker 1: come to the conclusion that he or she knows what
Speaker 1: happened on that day in that place if anything. Um,
Speaker 1: absolutely not. And if that's the case, and your decision
Speaker 1: turns on whether you believe Judge Kavanaugh did this or
Speaker 1: didn't do it, you have to vote to confirm it's
Speaker 1: the president's prerogative to appoint this person. If that's what
Speaker 1: your decision is turning on. No one can say, based
Speaker 1: on what I saw yesterday, I know that he's a
Speaker 1: sexual assault or something like that. Well, let me. Let
Speaker 1: me go back to the d c McAlister and Um,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of things where I watched very very
Speaker 1: closely yesterday. I really did. I watched. I wanted to
Speaker 1: pay attention and listen to everybody in all of this.
Speaker 1: And when you have a case where allegations are made,
Speaker 1: and this was not the only allegation that was made.
Speaker 1: I mean, you have the the second case against that
Speaker 1: was written about in the New Yorker against in this
Speaker 1: case Judge Kavanaugh again and and you break down that case,
Speaker 1: and you look at what we have, and even the
Speaker 1: New York Times concluded they couldn't report on it and
Speaker 1: that Ms Ramirez in that particular case had contradicted herself.
Speaker 1: Uh and contacted Yale classmates asking if they recalled the
Speaker 1: incident and telling them that she couldn't be certain Mr
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh was the that exposed himself. And she became quote
Speaker 1: quickly inebriated at the party. She told the New Yorker
Speaker 1: she was foggy, slurring a word, she had significant memory
Speaker 1: gaps from the evening, etcetera. And then if you go
Speaker 1: to the Abenati case, this case of Julie swittnik Um,
Speaker 1: and you watch that particular case, she's literally saying that
Speaker 1: she went to at least ten parties, but it happened
Speaker 1: almost every weekend went over a period of years, and
Speaker 1: that all of these boys were responsible for drugging and
Speaker 1: getting these girls totally inebriated and knocked out, and then
Speaker 1: boys would line the hall waiting their turn to gang rape,
Speaker 1: trail rape women as if we never would have heard
Speaker 1: of that in thirty six years before. And she went
Speaker 1: back to those parties that did not seem plausible to
Speaker 1: me an accusation evidence, and that's all we have here.
Speaker 1: There is no credible evidence against and they're still believing
Speaker 1: that this woman just because she's made an act usation.
Speaker 1: And this is the real problem that we have when
Speaker 1: we have someone come up with an accusation. We have
Speaker 1: to believe the innocent until the person accusing proves their guilt.
Speaker 1: It cannot be the other way around. We have to
Speaker 1: we have to say I believe breat Kavanaugh because it
Speaker 1: has to be proven that he actually did it. And
Speaker 1: if we go down this path in our nation, we
Speaker 1: really have lost our principles of liberty. We've lost our freedom,
Speaker 1: and it's being targeted, targeted against men right now, men
Speaker 1: are the ones who are the target of feminism, of
Speaker 1: statis m of the of the culture right now. And
Speaker 1: if you don't see that as the broad problem in
Speaker 1: our culture, then I want to know where you've been.
Speaker 1: And this is just on display and this whole thing.
Speaker 1: It's about abortions that with Supreme Court, but it's also
Speaker 1: about the civil society and how we're treating one another. Well,
Speaker 1: I think this is the thing. I mean, look, at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, most Democrats have made up
Speaker 1: their minds. They had no open mind as it relates
Speaker 1: to Breck Havanov, and I think a lot of what
Speaker 1: we have been witnessing was really targeting maybe the few
Speaker 1: people that are in the middle that that thought they
Speaker 1: can sway and they thought they had to go this
Speaker 1: far over the top. And you know, and the evidence
Speaker 1: that this was political from the beginning is none of
Speaker 1: these people have ever talked about Brett Kavanaugh. None of
Speaker 1: these people, I'm sorry about Keith Ellison this way. None
Speaker 1: of these people have ever you know, condemned Bill Clinton
Speaker 1: this way. Nobody's asking that I wanted to broaderick at
Speaker 1: her FBI investigation and her week of investigation, and she
Speaker 1: told me last night many of these people wouldn't even
Speaker 1: read the report that was written about her, so it's
Speaker 1: obviously politics. All right, we gotta take a break. We'll
Speaker 1: come back with our panel and as we can send
Speaker 1: you our final moments with David Shawn, d C. McAlister,
Speaker 1: and Kayleie mcinaney, and then we're gonna play. Uh. Lindsey
Speaker 1: Graham's speech today was phenomen I'm gonna play it. Come
Speaker 1: when we come back, you're gonna want to hear this.
Speaker 1: I'll give you the final word. Each can see. David
Speaker 1: will start with you this time. Yeah. I think that
Speaker 1: the agenda that is removed from whether or not Chris
Speaker 1: Kevanaugh did this is apparent from things like Dianne Feinstein's
Speaker 1: reaction all of a sudden, she was stunned yesterday after
Speaker 1: his speech. She must have lost hundreds or thousands of votes,
Speaker 1: But today she turns to well, I'm voting against him
Speaker 1: because of his temperament. Uh. I don't like the way
Speaker 1: you handle things. The man finally came alive. This is personal.
Speaker 1: This isn't him as a judge. There's a personal tech
Speaker 1: of his character and on his family. Reactively, you should
Speaker 1: have reacted. This is the politics that have become personal,
Speaker 1: and he had every right to respond the way he did.
Speaker 1: There was no evidence against him. She did not prove
Speaker 1: her case, and we need to remember that this isn't
Speaker 1: about caring for women. Are believing women. But if you're
Speaker 1: going to accuse someone, you better tossed up the evidence.
Speaker 1: Otherwise we're going to accuse believe the person who's been accused,
Speaker 1: because that's the way America is just about proving their innocence. Now,
Speaker 1: no presumption of innocence anymore, Kaylee mcinanny. Yeah, there's no
Speaker 1: presumption of innocence. And make no mistake, you know the last.
Speaker 1: They will win at any cost. They don't care what
Speaker 1: reputations are destroyed, lives forever change, or the damage done
Speaker 1: to the process. They simply do not care. They do
Speaker 1: not care about the merit of these accusations. If they did,
Speaker 1: they would have brought them forward in July. And if
Speaker 1: they did care about merits and accusations like this, they'd
Speaker 1: be looking over at Keith Ellison number two, at the
Speaker 1: d n C amount of evidence against him, two accusers,
Speaker 1: medical documentations, text messages. But they don't care because this
Speaker 1: guy has a d behind his name. He has Democrats
Speaker 1: demarcation behind his name, so he gets two different standards.
Speaker 1: Said all right, thank you all for being with us.
Speaker 1: Lindsey Graham gave a final statement that you we gotta
Speaker 1: hear this and this entirety. Then of course we have
Speaker 1: our news round up, information overload, Eric Bowling among our guests,
Speaker 1: and much much more. Stay with us on the Sean
Speaker 1: Hannity Show, and you're called straight ahead, by the way,
Speaker 1: you want to call your senator or any of them
Speaker 1: to two to two four thirty one one two o
Speaker 1: two two two four thirty one or can we be specific?
Speaker 1: We can, but it takes too long. No, it never
Speaker 1: takes too long and specific to do it. No, that's true.
Speaker 1: But I mean, at least you can say go ahead.
Speaker 1: You can be as specific as you want to be.
Speaker 1: I'm going to be specific. Are you ready? You want
Speaker 1: to call Joe Mansion Mansion, you can call him at
Speaker 1: two O two two four four. You want to call
Speaker 1: Heidi Hike Camp Camp two o two two four two
Speaker 1: zero four three two zero four three. Susan Collins, Susan
Speaker 1: Collins two two two four to five to three to
Speaker 1: five to three Lisa Murkowski, Murkowski two O two two
Speaker 1: four six six six six six five six five and
Speaker 1: then last but not least, flaky flake flakey flake, snowflake
Speaker 1: freight at the elevator two O two two four two
Speaker 1: four four or five? Was that a minute of your life?
Speaker 1: Was all right? The main switchboard number two? Alright, one
Speaker 1: show before all those went down with obviously snowflake today, Um,
Speaker 1: Lindsey Graham laid out the case in his statement. And
Speaker 1: I will tell you I've had debates with Lindsey Graham
Speaker 1: over the years. We've had falling outs over the years,
Speaker 1: and um, but he had his finest moment I thought
Speaker 1: yesterday and then today followed it up, and I think
Speaker 1: this is worth playing. And this is what he said
Speaker 1: before this mess earlier. I know I'm a single white
Speaker 1: male from South Carolina, and I've told I should shut up,
Speaker 1: but I will not shut up, if that's okay, because
Speaker 1: I got here the same way everybody else did. The
Speaker 1: people in South Carolina voted for me and Senator Scott
Speaker 1: to be their voice men and women, and I'm gonna
Speaker 1: try to be their boys today. And uh, maybe not
Speaker 1: just for South Carolina, but a little bit of out
Speaker 1: what I think is going on here. Joe Biden. I
Speaker 1: can't believe we're saying this on our side listen to Joe.
Speaker 1: But Joe was right a lot. Joe Biden is a
Speaker 1: unique guy. If you had one last conversation before you die,
Speaker 1: you don't want to have it with Joe. You'd be
Speaker 1: around for a while. He's a decent guy. If he
Speaker 1: runs for president, it would be hard to be. He
Speaker 1: came to Senator Thurman's funeral and gave a long eulogy,
Speaker 1: and I asked him, Joe, I said, that was incredible,
Speaker 1: as Kent help you in Delaware. So I just liked
Speaker 1: the old guy. I didn't agree with him, and I
Speaker 1: didn't like some of the things he did in his life,
Speaker 1: but when I was down and out, he was there
Speaker 1: for me. To my colleagues on the other side, this
Speaker 1: will end and we'll see what we do next. I
Speaker 1: hope we can muster the ability to move forward. But
Speaker 1: some observations about where we find ourselves and how we
Speaker 1: got here. I wrote a book, and I think Senator
Speaker 1: bloom with All is the only person I know that
Speaker 1: I actually read it. It was online. I ran for
Speaker 1: president and I got one percent, so I had my
Speaker 1: time to be president, didn't go very far, and I lost.
Speaker 1: I didn't think Trump would win. I ran out of
Speaker 1: adjectives to describe about how it felt about his campaign. Well,
Speaker 1: he won and I lost, and he's president, and I'll
Speaker 1: try to help him where I can and say no
Speaker 1: one I must and the elections over for me. I
Speaker 1: would like to tell him that you had a choice
Speaker 1: to make for the Supreme Court vacancy of Justice Kennedy.
Speaker 1: I think he did a good job, Mr Preston. For
Speaker 1: somebody who supposedly crazy and there's chaos everywhere, he did
Speaker 1: a good job here. Now, why difference between Gorsic and Kennedy.
Speaker 1: I'm excuse me, Gorsic and Kavanaugh. It's the Kennedy seat.
Speaker 1: You don't get that. You're not paying much attention. Gorsic
Speaker 1: is a even swap for Scalia. But this is high
Speaker 1: stakes stuff, right, This is the seat where the guy
Speaker 1: in the middle is at risk. Kavanaugh clerked for Justice Kennedy.
Speaker 1: Would you have picked him? No, but you lost the election,
Speaker 1: and that does have consequences. When I said it about
Speaker 1: Obama winning, Imant Marritt Garland, Scalia dies in the election
Speaker 1: year the last year of the term of President Obama.
Speaker 1: The primaries are already under way. Not in a hundred
Speaker 1: years has anybody been nominated under that circumstance. So I
Speaker 1: don't think I did anything unfair with Garland. As to
Speaker 1: Sodomyr and Kagan, I was told on our side, you've
Speaker 1: got to keep them off the court because they're gonna
Speaker 1: be a pro choice vote, they hate guns, on and
Speaker 1: on and on, and I tried to go back to
Speaker 1: what this committee used to do. Strong Thurman voted for Ginsburg.
Speaker 1: You'll never convince me that was because you agree with
Speaker 1: her philosophy. I think he saw in her a qualified person.
Speaker 1: Prince Hollings voted for Scalia, the same as true nine
Speaker 1: and ninety seven votes. What's how most of the nominees
Speaker 1: Supreme Court never had a hearing. It was always just assumed,
Speaker 1: if they're qualified and they're not hacks, that they're gonna
Speaker 1: go forward. Elections do matter when it comes to President Trump.
Speaker 1: Elections do matter. Now about the law, and to my
Speaker 1: friends who have been prosecutors, I've been a prosecutor, I've
Speaker 1: been a defense attorney, and I've been a judge. Every
Speaker 1: woman who has been victimized needs to be heard. Count
Speaker 1: me in a thousand times over Count me in for
Speaker 1: the proposition for every one woman who comes forward. Only
Speaker 1: God knows how many women and children go to their
Speaker 1: grave with the abuse. If you don't realize that, you
Speaker 1: just don't know this area of life. But you're got
Speaker 1: to be heard. In the United States, I had a
Speaker 1: young man accused of sexual assault when I was in
Speaker 1: the Air Force as a defense attorney. The case eventually
Speaker 1: fell apart and he almost killed himself. I had women
Speaker 1: who have been gang raped and more to testify, but
Speaker 1: they did along with counselor as I set up with
Speaker 1: them all night. Tough stuff, emotional, who to believe. I've
Speaker 1: been doing this legal stuff most of my life. I've
Speaker 1: never heard a more compelling defense of one's honor and
Speaker 1: integrity than I did from Brett Kavanaugh. He looked me
Speaker 1: in the eye, everybody in the eye, and he was mad,
Speaker 1: and he should have been mad. He could tell you
Speaker 1: where he was at, what he was doing during high
Speaker 1: school in a way that just blew me away. Brett
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh and women, if you're a gang rapist when you're
Speaker 1: a sophomore and a junior in high school, you don't
Speaker 1: let it go. Every woman who actually knows Brett Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: has come forward to say he is not that kind
Speaker 1: of guy. He has been at the highest level of
Speaker 1: public service under tremendous scrutiny, six FBI investigations, and we
Speaker 1: missed the sophomore junior gang rapist. We didn't miss it.
Speaker 1: It's much garbage. We're in the twilight zone. And here's
Speaker 1: what I would say Miss Ford. All I can say
Speaker 1: about miss Ford. I feel sorry for her, and I
Speaker 1: do believe something happened to her, and I don't know
Speaker 1: when and where, but I don't believe it was Brett Kavanaugh.
Speaker 1: And as a prosecutor, you couldn't get out of the
Speaker 1: batter's box because in America, before you can shoot, accuse
Speaker 1: somebody but crime, you have to tell them when it
Speaker 1: happened and where it happened, and you have to prove
Speaker 1: beyond a reasonable doubt it did happen. The reason this
Speaker 1: case will never be brought in Maryland or anywhere else,
Speaker 1: you just can't get there. If you wanted to get
Speaker 1: a warrant, which is a probable call standard to search
Speaker 1: or arrest somebody, you got to prove by probable cause
Speaker 1: where it happened, and when it happened. How are you
Speaker 1: supposed to defend yourself? Is the burden really on you
Speaker 1: to prove that you were not at a party thirty
Speaker 1: five years ago? And they won't tell you where it
Speaker 1: wasn't when it was. So all I can say is
Speaker 1: that under any reasonable standard, any concept of the rule law,
Speaker 1: this would not go forward. There's been five allegations here.
Speaker 1: The fifth alleg gation was brought to me by Senator
Speaker 1: White else who did absolutely the right thing. Somebody contacted
Speaker 1: him in Rhode Island and said a friend of his
Speaker 1: was on a boat with Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.
Speaker 1: They treated badly. He went down and beat him up,
Speaker 1: and she won't come forward. I said, well, I'll make
Speaker 1: sure I'll join with you. Let the FBI look at it,
Speaker 1: and turned out not to be true. The fourth allegation
Speaker 1: was an anonymous allegation, a letter without a date or
Speaker 1: return address sent to Corey Gardner just a few days ago,
Speaker 1: and he turned it over to the committee, and somebody
Speaker 1: on that side linked at the NBC News and it
Speaker 1: made it on the news. The fourth allegation that really
Speaker 1: bothers me. I don't know what's going on over there,
Speaker 1: But that's not right. It was somebody over there now
Speaker 1: about ms Ford. I feel really bad that she wanted
Speaker 1: to remain anonymous and could not. The one thing I
Speaker 1: know for sure is that Diane Feinstein would not do
Speaker 1: this and did not do this, but I know for
Speaker 1: sure somebody did. It wouldn't chatter from a friend. Three
Speaker 1: groups had this letter that was requested to be anonymous.
Speaker 1: Diane Feinstein and her staff, the congresswoman from California and
Speaker 1: her staff, and the lawyers. Somebody betrayed her trust. And
Speaker 1: if you can't figure out why, you shouldn't be driving
Speaker 1: to delay this hearing, to set in motion to destruction
Speaker 1: of this man, to keep this seat open past the election.
Speaker 1: That I know beyond any any doubt. What else do
Speaker 1: I know about? Fell out of my chair when Dr
Speaker 1: Ford said yesterday, I didn't know you would be willing
Speaker 1: to come to me the email interactions between this committee
Speaker 1: and her lawyers. My staff would still welcome the opportunity
Speaker 1: to speak with dot Ford at any time in any
Speaker 1: place convenient to her, come to us or weak to you.
Speaker 1: I'm willing to have my staff travel to Dr Ford
Speaker 1: in California or anywhere else to obtain her testimony September nineteen. Well,
Speaker 1: that wouldn't fit in the plan, it wouldn't be public,
Speaker 1: and it would get over with sooner than people wanted.
Speaker 1: I don't know what to believe, but I tend to
Speaker 1: believe that Dr Ford did not know about this invitation.
Speaker 1: And I've been a lawyer most of my adult life,
Speaker 1: and somebody needs to ask the question to her lawyers,
Speaker 1: how could she not know about this? Are you beginning
Speaker 1: to understand what's been going on for a very long
Speaker 1: time in this case? It's not that hard to figure out.
Speaker 1: So if this is the new standard, the accusation proves
Speaker 1: itself to those who want to ask questions. You hate women.
Speaker 1: God help us all. If the new standard for the
Speaker 1: committee is that there's no presumption of anything, that you
Speaker 1: have to prove why somebody would accuse you, not just
Speaker 1: say I didn't do it, and here's why I didn't
Speaker 1: do it, but you got to prove the motives of
Speaker 1: your accuser. God help us all to have any moment
Speaker 1: tells you what's gonna happen if we keep this far?
Speaker 1: Is going plenty of time, plenty of opportunities to get
Speaker 1: to the truth. This has never been about the truth.
Speaker 1: This has been about delay and destruction. And if we
Speaker 1: reward this, it is the end of good people wanting
Speaker 1: to be judges. It is the end of any concept
Speaker 1: of the rule of law. It's the beginning of a
Speaker 1: process that will tear this country apart. And if I
Speaker 1: am chairman next year, if we keep the majority and
Speaker 1: Senator Draft Lee moves over, and I hope he doesn't
Speaker 1: because says I think he's done a great job. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna remember this. There's the process before Kavanaugh and the
Speaker 1: process after Kavanaugh. If you want to vet the nominee,
Speaker 1: you can. If you want to delay things for the
Speaker 1: next election, you will not. If you try to destroy somebody,
Speaker 1: you will not get away with it. Jeff is leaving.
Speaker 1: He has wrastled with this. He is trying to be fair.
Speaker 1: I cannot tell you, Jeff, what happened thirty five years ago.
Speaker 1: I can tell you this that through any legal system,
Speaker 1: this thing would not get out of the batter's box,
Speaker 1: and that everything I know about Judge Kavanaugh screams that
Speaker 1: this didn't happen and all the other things. So to
Speaker 1: my good friend friends on the other side who are
Speaker 1: struggling I think an FBI investigation this is going to
Speaker 1: do nothing. It's not gonna tell you anymore than we
Speaker 1: know now. It's gonna just keep it going and going
Speaker 1: and going till he breaks, and he walked and toil
Speaker 1: the next five come forward. I'm going to vote yes,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna tell his two daughters that I'm proud
Speaker 1: of your dad and I really really believe he's a
Speaker 1: good man. And I'm gonna tell Dr Ford, I am
Speaker 1: sorry you had to go through this too. All right,
Speaker 1: let's get to our busy telephones, as we can tell you.
Speaker 1: Eric is in Florida. Eric, Hi, how are you glad?
Speaker 1: You called? Sir? Yes, sir? What's going on? Are you doing?
Speaker 1: I'm good? How are you well? Resours calling? Was? I
Speaker 1: think there's actually a silver liing to this whole thing,
Speaker 1: and that is, um, you know, they're asking for an
Speaker 1: FBI investigation. They're gonna get it, and uh, you know,
Speaker 1: it's one of these things where I don't think the
Speaker 1: Democrats were actually anticipating at whatever happened. And now as
Speaker 1: a result of it, what is potentially going to happen
Speaker 1: is the FBI is going to be turned onto these people.
Speaker 1: So when they start investigating these claims of gang rape,
Speaker 1: they're gonna be looking into people like um Avanadi and
Speaker 1: how these people potentially may have gotten involved, or how
Speaker 1: people's personal information was leaked from confidential sources in Congress. Well,
Speaker 1: I think you know, listen, there's a lot, there's a
Speaker 1: lot to leak. Here's the problem, and I keep saying it,
Speaker 1: but nobody seems to want to hear it. But it matters.
Speaker 1: We already know the FBI does not make recommendations. We
Speaker 1: know they don't reach conclusions. And we also know that
Speaker 1: the four witnesses in the case of ms Ford have
Speaker 1: already gone on the record, and as it relates to
Speaker 1: what they did on the record, they did it under
Speaker 1: the threat of felony. So I mean, unless they're willing
Speaker 1: to take the felony charge, I would assume they're gonna
Speaker 1: stand on their position. Um to me, this is a
Speaker 1: delayed tactic, and I think all these Rhino Republicans predictably, well,
Speaker 1: what what is it they think they're gonna get here,
Speaker 1: except that they get the delay that they want, and
Speaker 1: that you know, I just this is why I've been
Speaker 1: saying this is the most important mid term election in
Speaker 1: our lifetime. This can all come to an end. You
Speaker 1: know this, This can all stop if you give the president,
Speaker 1: Congress and the Senate. And that's why you know this
Speaker 1: blue wave. If it happens, it's gonna be so much worse.
Speaker 1: I gotta take a break here. We'll come back all
Speaker 1: of our news round Up, Information Overload more with Jonathan Gillham,
Speaker 1: Daniel McLaughlin, our buddy UH from the Fox News Channel,
Speaker 1: Bowling is going to be with us, and much more
Speaker 1: as we continue. Coming up next our final news round
Speaker 1: Up and Information Overload hour. I have been speaking with
Speaker 1: a number of people on the other side. We've had
Speaker 1: conversations ongoing for a while with regard to UM making
Speaker 1: sure that we do due diligence here, and I think
Speaker 1: it would be UH proper to delay the floor vote
Speaker 1: for up to but not more than one week in
Speaker 1: order to let the FBI UM continue to do an
Speaker 1: investigation limited in time and scope to the current allegations
Speaker 1: that are there and limited time to know more than
Speaker 1: one week. And I will vote to advance the bill
Speaker 1: UH to the floor with that understanding. And I've spoken
Speaker 1: to a few other members UM who on my side
Speaker 1: of the aisle that may be supportive as well, but
Speaker 1: that's my position. I think that that we we ought
Speaker 1: to do what we can to make sure that that
Speaker 1: we do all due diligence with an nomination. That's important.
Speaker 1: And I want to say that this committee has acted
Speaker 1: properly and the chairman has been over backwards to do
Speaker 1: investigations from this committee and to delay this vote in
Speaker 1: this committee for a week so that Judge or that Uh,
Speaker 1: that this Ford Dr Ford could be heard, and she
Speaker 1: was yesterday. So so that's with that agreement, I will
Speaker 1: vote to adance bill to the floor a right that.
Speaker 1: Of course, earlier today, the drama unfolding in the Senate
Speaker 1: with Arizona Senator Jeff Flake name, I guess is appropriate
Speaker 1: because he had said he was going to vote it
Speaker 1: out a committee, and then a bunch of Democrats corner
Speaker 1: room and then he's like, maybe we're just another week
Speaker 1: of investigations. You know what that means? Another week of
Speaker 1: Michael Labnati uh gang and trail rape and and boys
Speaker 1: lined up. I guess stories will be coming out for
Speaker 1: yet another week. You know, look at what we went
Speaker 1: through yesterday. If that if the testimony of Judge Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: didn't move you to see that this man is innocent
Speaker 1: of this. I don't I don't know. What will you
Speaker 1: know if you look at the charges just to review.
Speaker 1: You know, in the case of Professor Ford, she made
Speaker 1: these allegations. Remember the Democratic Party knew back in July,
Speaker 1: and they did nothing. They've had the opportunity to investigate
Speaker 1: the whole time. And Diane Feinstein is meeting with Judge
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh alone. And little does Judge Kavanaugh know that behind
Speaker 1: the scenes, while she's not telling him a thing, she's
Speaker 1: getting a radical left wing lawyer for for Professor Ford,
Speaker 1: a person that didn't support Paula Jones and a person
Speaker 1: that did support creepy L. Frankin. You know, you look
Speaker 1: at the charges thirty six years ago out Republicans have
Speaker 1: been more than a commendating the president, more than accommodating us.
Speaker 1: Professor Ford deserved to be heard. These allegations are serious.
Speaker 1: She didn't remember a date or a day of the week,
Speaker 1: or a location or how she got to him from
Speaker 1: the party, when the where the alleged crime took place.
Speaker 1: And then we have four witnesses, four of them, and
Speaker 1: a new statement again today by the person that supposedly
Speaker 1: was in the room corroborating they she named these people
Speaker 1: as people that would corroborate her story, except all four
Speaker 1: now and sworn statements under penalty of felony. Under penalty
Speaker 1: of felony. That means it's all been investigated anyway, and
Speaker 1: that includes Professor Ford's friend named Leland Kaiser. Her attorney
Speaker 1: released a statement simply put ms. Kaiser does not know
Speaker 1: Mr Kavanaugh, no recollection of ever being at a party
Speaker 1: or gathering where he was present with or without Dr
Speaker 1: Ford anyway. So this all goes on, and now we're
Speaker 1: gonna see what happened. This was, this is, this is
Speaker 1: what the Democrats wanted. So they got Flake at least
Speaker 1: for a week. And now the question is, well, what
Speaker 1: is Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski going to do? I
Speaker 1: don't know what else we're gonna get when the four
Speaker 1: main people, Remember, the Senate has their own investigative body.
Speaker 1: You know, there's been the main argument that the left
Speaker 1: has been making again and we need an FBI investigation. Well,
Speaker 1: the problem with the FBI investigation, you know, and and
Speaker 1: that was the big talking point is they don't make conclusions.
Speaker 1: And of course Brett Kavanaugh has already been investigated by
Speaker 1: the FBI six separate times. None of these things have
Speaker 1: ever come up. And the person that told us that
Speaker 1: it's it's kind of you don't want to use the
Speaker 1: FBI as investigation was Joe Biden. Back in here's what
Speaker 1: he said. The next person that refers to an FBI
Speaker 1: reporters being worth anything obviously doesn't understand anything. FBI explicitly
Speaker 1: does not in this or any other case reach a
Speaker 1: conclusion period period. So judge, there's no reason why you
Speaker 1: should know this. The reason why we cannot rely on
Speaker 1: the FBI report. You wouldn't like it if we did,
Speaker 1: because it is inconclusive, they say, he said, she said,
Speaker 1: and they said period. So when people wave an FBI
Speaker 1: report before, you understand they do not. They do not
Speaker 1: They do not reach conclusions, they do not make as
Speaker 1: my friend points out, more atticate, they do not make recommendations,
Speaker 1: They do not make conclusions. And the whole thing is
Speaker 1: is everybody has known this now, and what's happened is
Speaker 1: what I pointed out is forget about due process, forget
Speaker 1: about presumption of In a sense, frankly, if this heads
Speaker 1: in the direction democrats want, that means you know, smear slam,
Speaker 1: under character, assassination. It's just gonna keep happening to any
Speaker 1: but nobody's ever wanna gonna want to go in the
Speaker 1: public eye. This guy has had a nearly forty year
Speaker 1: career and up to thirteen days ago, not a single
Speaker 1: word against him. Less than thirteen days ago, nothing like
Speaker 1: this ever coming up his entire life. And this is
Speaker 1: where we now find ourselves. Anyway, News round Up, Information Overload.
Speaker 1: Jonathan Gillham, author of Sheep No More. Danielle McLaughlin, attorney,
Speaker 1: constitutional expert, liberal, Uh, let me ask you this. You
Speaker 1: just heard Joe Biden and what he said that they
Speaker 1: don't reach conclusions, they don't give recommendations in any way. Um,
Speaker 1: we already have the four people that Professor Forded named.
Speaker 1: They've all given sworn statements under the threat of felony.
Speaker 1: I mean, are we expecting if we don't know where
Speaker 1: the house is, we can't go back and look for
Speaker 1: something forensically. This isn't forensic files, which there's a show
Speaker 1: that I've watched a lot. So what new information can
Speaker 1: we possibly get? Okay, Sean, Hey, Jonathan, great to be
Speaker 1: with you. This has been a rough week for all
Speaker 1: of us. I think, regardless of where you sit on
Speaker 1: the political spectrum, um, I think the point of the
Speaker 1: FBI investigation is clearly to gather more facts and to
Speaker 1: talk to the people who have provided to warn affidavits.
Speaker 1: One thing that's really important to know it is that
Speaker 1: the witnesses don't say it never happened. They say they
Speaker 1: don't remember that it happened. And those are two very
Speaker 1: different things, both in a court of law and even
Speaker 1: in the set slow down. Though, if they don't remember
Speaker 1: any such party in any such way, at any such time,
Speaker 1: and they've made that statement a sworn statement under the
Speaker 1: threat of felony, what else can you give me any
Speaker 1: possible evidence that anybody else could find? Well, you know,
Speaker 1: Dr Ford indicated, No, no, no, no, no, what what
Speaker 1: possible evidence can you find? Well, you can talk to them,
Speaker 1: maybe you'll be able to they've already been talked to. Well,
Speaker 1: they've ready given sworn statements under the threat of felony.
Speaker 1: So if they change their statement, they would be guilty
Speaker 1: of lying under oath. Well, this is true. Look, I
Speaker 1: actually think this is a win for Republicans, and I'd
Speaker 1: like to explain why you've got a better chance of
Speaker 1: confirming Bratt Havanaugh if this investigation is allowed to go ahead,
Speaker 1: because I think there will be new facts uncovered. I
Speaker 1: think the American people will be tearing each other apart
Speaker 1: a little bit less because we will have more to
Speaker 1: go on instead of just what we believe to be true.
Speaker 1: And but I'm asking you a very simple question, and
Speaker 1: you can't answer now that they've given. They've all given,
Speaker 1: all witnesses mentioned by Professor Ford have given sworn statements
Speaker 1: under the threat of felony. Okay, you could talk to
Speaker 1: them again, and if they contradict themselves, they've committed a felony. No,
Speaker 1: that's not true. So if I say on Monday that
Speaker 1: I don't remember, and then I talked to any FBI
Speaker 1: agent on Wednesday who gives me ships other pieces of
Speaker 1: information on that day, maybe I do remember, and maybe
Speaker 1: I can issue a denial. So I don't think that's
Speaker 1: a clear instance of of you know, of perjury. Um,
Speaker 1: I think that's actually fine. If it didn't happen and
Speaker 1: in six days later they see it did happen, that's
Speaker 1: that's perjury. But if you say you don't remember on
Speaker 1: a given on a given day and in six days later,
Speaker 1: you have more information and it lights something up from
Speaker 1: thirty six years ago. That's not perjury, okay, But all
Speaker 1: of a sudden you remember after thirty six years as
Speaker 1: if the first time they interviewed you, and all the
Speaker 1: days you've been watching all this you haven't said, oh,
Speaker 1: I think I'm changing my testimony, but now you're gonna
Speaker 1: do it. It would seem at that point that it's
Speaker 1: political and illogical that something new could possibly be found,
Speaker 1: except that Democrats want more time, for more people, for
Speaker 1: more smears, for more avanati digging. I guess, uh. Jonathan Gillen, Well,
Speaker 1: you know, I think the thing that we have to
Speaker 1: look at and that the American people need to understand
Speaker 1: is that what is occurring is not so much of
Speaker 1: a hearing as it is a trial in the court
Speaker 1: of public opinion. And the FBI doesn't investigate for public opinion.
Speaker 1: We investigate, uh. And in the case of these background checks,
Speaker 1: we are a collector of information. And if there is
Speaker 1: a crime that we find is committed, uh, we usually
Speaker 1: if it was something of the sexual nature in this case,
Speaker 1: we hand that over to the locals to investigate it.
Speaker 1: The problem that we have in this particular situation is
Speaker 1: that when we look at other um types of cases,
Speaker 1: whether it be you know, the ones that have been
Speaker 1: recently in the news, Harvey Weinstein Cosby, there's a pattern
Speaker 1: of events, there's known meetings that are that can be
Speaker 1: looked at, schedules where we know that these things have occurred. UH,
Speaker 1: and there's multiple sources coming forward that are not friends,
Speaker 1: that are from different areas that can corrup rate stories
Speaker 1: as well as UH rumors and known facts about people
Speaker 1: that these things have happened. In this case, none of
Speaker 1: that can be corroborated. If I was an investigator, There's
Speaker 1: nothing here except for more hearsay. There's no facts that
Speaker 1: are going to be able to to be brought out.
Speaker 1: There's no evidence of of a crime that may or
Speaker 1: may not have occurred other than what someone said. And
Speaker 1: it's not gonna do any good. It's just going to
Speaker 1: further uh the outrage in the court of public opinion.
Speaker 1: And the only thing that suffers when that is the case.
Speaker 1: You know, it's it's so unrealistic to think that the
Speaker 1: Democrats in a week, you're gonna say, when the FBI
Speaker 1: comes back with their again, they're not gonna make a
Speaker 1: conclusion or recommendation, and then they're gonna come back, and
Speaker 1: then the Democrats are gonna say, well, now we need
Speaker 1: to investigate these two other things and then we'll be done,
Speaker 1: and then the delay continues. Well, you say that, but
Speaker 1: there's nothing. But every dem acrad has already said no,
Speaker 1: except for like three as it relates to cabinet. Most
Speaker 1: of them said they will do anything it takes to
Speaker 1: destroy him. Well, and on the Republicans side there all right,
Speaker 1: we're not talking about Republicans. I am. I am saying
Speaker 1: to you that not one Democrat is going to change
Speaker 1: their mind based on the FBI report. They're on record
Speaker 1: saying no. They said no before he They said no,
Speaker 1: many of them the day he was named, right and
Speaker 1: some and some Republicans sinues the night day he was named.
Speaker 1: And as these information, these allegations came out because they've
Speaker 1: known him. He serves in the second most important court
Speaker 1: in the country, and many even back then offered advice
Speaker 1: and consent when he got confirmed, So they knew him.
Speaker 1: But to say no because it's Donald Trump's pick is
Speaker 1: a very different Your analogy doesn't fit. Look on these
Speaker 1: court nominations for years and years and years. This is
Speaker 1: a new law. But I do think it's a new low.
Speaker 1: But you want to continue going lower? Is that what
Speaker 1: you're saying, Let's keep going lower. Let's go see how
Speaker 1: we think. I do think it is better for this
Speaker 1: country that there is a week given to look in
Speaker 1: another week given, and you and and what is the
Speaker 1: new information you can possibly get? My point and Jonathan's
Speaker 1: point is you can't get any new information? Are we
Speaker 1: gotta take a break? Uh? Right, as we continue, Jonathan
Speaker 1: Hillham and Daniel McLaughlin uh, commenting about Jeff Flake and
Speaker 1: his antics from earlier today. Uh. Jonathan will start with you, Well,
Speaker 1: you know, this is one thing that does bother me, Sean.
Speaker 1: Is that and nobody's really talking about this yet, is
Speaker 1: that if this is handed over back to the FBI,
Speaker 1: and this fact that Flake is the one that's saying that,
Speaker 1: is that this should occur. Um, we do still have
Speaker 1: a realistic expectation that the deep state is part of
Speaker 1: the FBI. And at the level that this is that
Speaker 1: if it's handed back to the FBI, my worry is
Speaker 1: it actually some he will create something that's ticitious that
Speaker 1: is in the FBI. It's not like they haven't done
Speaker 1: that in the past three years, so I also think
Speaker 1: that that's something that should be considered. And what's been
Speaker 1: presented so far, there's no evidence that that can prove anything.
Speaker 1: I think there's been enough testimony where the Judge Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: can be confirmed. And if it goes back, there is
Speaker 1: the chance of that, I hate to say it, but
Speaker 1: there's the chance that the deep state could get involved
Speaker 1: in this. I've got a solution to that, you know.
Speaker 1: Interview break Kavina's college roommate, interview my judge, do some
Speaker 1: investigation as to when he worked at that supermarket. Release
Speaker 1: all of the three O two's, which are the notes
Speaker 1: of the investigations to the public. None of the stuff
Speaker 1: is classified, and then we all have the facts in
Speaker 1: our hands, and hopefully some of this part of the
Speaker 1: bickering will calm down a little bit. All Right, We'll
Speaker 1: take a break. Thank you both of being with us.
Speaker 1: When we come back. Eric Bowling weighs in on this,
Speaker 1: and we gotta tell you something kind of a big
Speaker 1: EN's been here for the program, and Eric and Linda
Speaker 1: and much more san is our number have this poison
Speaker 1: being dumped in our country and our communities are suffering.
Speaker 1: Kids are dropping dead every day of the week. Parents
Speaker 1: of good kids are going up to their bedrooms finding
Speaker 1: their kids past out day. I mean, this is a
Speaker 1: crisis that we've never seen before, so we need a
Speaker 1: greatest sense of urgency. Al Right, glad you want us
Speaker 1: now to the top of the seawan. That is from
Speaker 1: a brand new documentary. Actually, our own Linda had a
Speaker 1: big part to play in all of this, Uh, Sarah Carter.
Speaker 1: It's a nonprofit group called Dark Wire, and in this
Speaker 1: DC on Monday, they are going to do the premiere
Speaker 1: of this documentary and at some point we're gonna make
Speaker 1: it available to all of you as well. It's extraordinarily
Speaker 1: well done. If you're a parent, you need to watch it.
Speaker 1: It's called Not in Vain. It features the stark reality
Speaker 1: and truth and the dark truth about drugs crossing the
Speaker 1: open borders and the incredible need for national security at
Speaker 1: our borders. Joining us now is a good friend of
Speaker 1: the program, former host of The Five on the Fox
Speaker 1: News Channel. He's now on CRTV, and my friend Derek
Speaker 1: Bowling is back with us. Before we get to this,
Speaker 1: have you've been watching this madness and Jeff Flake all
Speaker 1: day on the Supreme Court. Sean, I'm just I'm I
Speaker 1: tweeted that P. T. Barnum would be proud of the circus,
Speaker 1: and then I just said, you know, a circus intermission
Speaker 1: until Tuesday. It's amazing what we've reduced the Honorable Respectable
Speaker 1: Senate Chamber to to this type of sanity. But finally
Speaker 1: they pushed it through and then we're gonna get the
Speaker 1: vote on Tuesday, which which we should see. I'm not
Speaker 1: so sure we're gonna see it on Tuesday, though. I
Speaker 1: think that you know, when he gets if he gets
Speaker 1: Susan Collins Lisa Murkowski, then that's it. I can see
Speaker 1: that happening. And by the way, the thing is is
Speaker 1: under penalty of a felony, all of the people, the
Speaker 1: four eye witnesses in the case of Professor Ford. Let
Speaker 1: me tell you what that gives. That gives the Democrats
Speaker 1: another week of the Michael Avanadis of the world, you know,
Speaker 1: coming up with more bizarre It's clear, you know. So
Speaker 1: it's not even it's it's not even the rule of
Speaker 1: law or evidence in the court. It's not even the Constitution.
Speaker 1: It's not even American the world. Do you want to
Speaker 1: do you want to live in a past, a world
Speaker 1: where a simple accusation of thirty five year old thirty
Speaker 1: five year old foggy recollection can put someone's name, reputation, family,
Speaker 1: and livelihood at risk. It's insanity. We've got to get
Speaker 1: back to sanity at some point. I think, hopefully Tuesday
Speaker 1: that will happen. Yeah, hopefully it will. Um. What we
Speaker 1: witnessed yesterday was beyond a circus. It was sad. You
Speaker 1: you you watch the destruction of a human being literally
Speaker 1: in twelve days. How to destroy a man in his
Speaker 1: family in twelve days after what was a without well
Speaker 1: this zero corroboration, and then so many of the other
Speaker 1: stories have been debunked. It's it's sad that this is
Speaker 1: what the state of the country. Sean. You and I
Speaker 1: both had one need to broderick on our shows I TV.
Speaker 1: You had her at the handity and she I asked
Speaker 1: I had I had the fortune of having thirty minutes
Speaker 1: where I had a really long sit down with her,
Speaker 1: and I asked her, can you tell me details of
Speaker 1: the room? She described to him, I said, do you
Speaker 1: remember the ride there? She described the ride there? So
Speaker 1: what the hotel lobby looks like? She described in mipid detail,
Speaker 1: everything about that night, that that morning with with Bill
Speaker 1: Klint when he raped her. Now for me that this
Speaker 1: is further back then, then Dr Ford has to remember,
Speaker 1: and Dr doesn't remember a lot of the details. It
Speaker 1: tells me something doesn't seem right, man, and it looks now.
Speaker 1: With one Broderick, she had been at a conference. Within
Speaker 1: thirty minutes, the person she was at the conference with
Speaker 1: saw her in her room with her lip which was
Speaker 1: bitten bloody three times its normal size, and immediately told
Speaker 1: somebody that she didn't want to go. She was afraid. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and she was. She was also talking about the ride
Speaker 1: to the event, to the hotel where the event, in
Speaker 1: the area where the event was going to happen, the
Speaker 1: ride back. When you look, when you listen to Dr
Speaker 1: Forced testimony, she can't remember how she got to the
Speaker 1: to the party. She doesn't remember how she got home.
Speaker 1: She wasn't sure what day of the week. It was
Speaker 1: vivid detail and wanted to Roderick of a rape and
Speaker 1: and alleged sexual misconduct act against um Miss Dr Ford
Speaker 1: very very few details. I'm not suggesting she didn't get
Speaker 1: harassed or molested. I'm simply suggesting it's not certain that
Speaker 1: it was Brett Kavanaugh that did it. We want to switch.
Speaker 1: And I know it's a Friday here, and we've been
Speaker 1: spending almost all week on this and there's a lot
Speaker 1: of important breaking news, but what we're about to talk
Speaker 1: about has become very near, dear and close to my
Speaker 1: heart in large part because of the tragedy in your
Speaker 1: life and you being a friend of mine. And that
Speaker 1: is just a little over a year ago, your son,
Speaker 1: Chase Pauling died. You got phone call and he had
Speaker 1: purchased a zanex a annex is an anti anxiety pill,
Speaker 1: and in it it was laced with fenton al and
Speaker 1: he died that night or that day. And I want
Speaker 1: you to talk a about your experience, and then I'm
Speaker 1: gonna bring Linda on as well, and why this And
Speaker 1: this is a nonprofit This is a nonprofit documentary um
Speaker 1: and it's called Not in Vain and premieres in Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. On Monday. And you always say to me,
Speaker 1: and you say to anybody you talk to, and I
Speaker 1: know you're working with the President, You're doing a lot
Speaker 1: of big things to to make people aware of how
Speaker 1: dangerous these drugs are. But you always say, don't think
Speaker 1: it can happen to your kids, because it can, and
Speaker 1: your I believe you because I've seen it too often. Now, Suan,
Speaker 1: you were there from from the minute it happened. They
Speaker 1: got a call. I got a call from you. I
Speaker 1: got a call from the President the next day, and
Speaker 1: I was in Adrian and I had my wife put
Speaker 1: in an absolute tale and you just the call you
Speaker 1: never expect to get. Just trust to a depth that's
Speaker 1: she describable. Um, I told you that I told the
Speaker 1: story on the show a couple of times, but she
Speaker 1: pulled the car over when when we got the call,
Speaker 1: we heard it and she fell onto the road and
Speaker 1: I had to pick her up and bring her back
Speaker 1: onto the side. And we sat there in confusion showing
Speaker 1: I get a call from the call from the president.
Speaker 1: So we fast forward a little bit and I spent
Speaker 1: a little bit of part of the last year in
Speaker 1: a month um talking to people, talking to groups, talking
Speaker 1: to families, talking to these uh talking to turning points
Speaker 1: USA kids and parents about what what what we need
Speaker 1: to do and kids really need to understand that. Eric
Speaker 1: Chase was a sophomore in college. He, like probably millions
Speaker 1: of other sophomore. Millions of other college kids bought us
Speaker 1: dannics on campus. It wasn't prescriptive and it was last
Speaker 1: know he passed. And I tell kids NonStop, one pill
Speaker 1: can killed. If you put a pill in your mouth,
Speaker 1: just understand it may be the last thing you do.
Speaker 1: I tell parents, parents, Mom, dad, listen, your kid isn't
Speaker 1: too smart, too academic to to, too adorable to athletic,
Speaker 1: too white, too black to eight, too straight to. Since
Speaker 1: gender doesn't matter, it will touch your kid at one point.
Speaker 1: There's nobody that not impacted the syndrome. Yes, you guys,
Speaker 1: just add one quick thing. So last time I was
Speaker 1: on the show, I talked to Linda a little bit,
Speaker 1: but it was got such wide appeal that you know,
Speaker 1: Demie Lvado um was was prouned dead. She was she
Speaker 1: overdosed on opioid and she was literally pronounced daddy at
Speaker 1: the see him. But they brought her back, They got
Speaker 1: her back to life. After that, within a couple of days,
Speaker 1: Demiel Levado's mom, Diana de Legarza called me and said, look,
Speaker 1: I need to get involved in this. My daughter and
Speaker 1: I are so close. I love her as soon as
Speaker 1: she's out of out of trouble. I want to get
Speaker 1: involved and said, I said, Diana, you will be the
Speaker 1: minute you're ready, and Demi's ready, You're gonna be part
Speaker 1: of this. I want to bring you on to this
Speaker 1: so we can we can save some lives together. And
Speaker 1: Linda had contacted me, your your producer to contact me
Speaker 1: and said, hey, can you get involved in this premiere
Speaker 1: in the movie. I said, I will, But you know
Speaker 1: what I'd like to do is I'd like to bring
Speaker 1: Demi Levado's mom and tell her story too, because it's
Speaker 1: really compelling. I mean assume it just shows that you
Speaker 1: can touch anyone, shown anybody. So she's going to be
Speaker 1: part of that premiere as well. That and this is
Speaker 1: what scares me. And you know you're never gonna recover
Speaker 1: from this. And I and I know you're strong. I
Speaker 1: know your wife is strong. I know you both. But
Speaker 1: you know you told me once that if it's just
Speaker 1: one the size of one grain of salt or two
Speaker 1: or three grains of salt from your shaker, and I'm
Speaker 1: not talking about the big grains of salt. It's a
Speaker 1: little tiny ionised salt grain that can kill a kid.
Speaker 1: And they're putting it purposefully in the in all of
Speaker 1: these drugs, from heroin to weed and everything. They're putting
Speaker 1: it everywhere, and some dealers are even looking out looking
Speaker 1: for some of the strongest stuff that can kill, because
Speaker 1: they'll get known as the dealer with the strongest drugs
Speaker 1: and doesn't even bother them they kill someone starts being strong.
Speaker 1: Show I'm not no, no you you you have been
Speaker 1: through you. You lost the love of your life, You
Speaker 1: lost your child. No parents should ever lose a child ever.
Speaker 1: And you know you get a you know, I remember
Speaker 1: when you got the call. You were in the car.
Speaker 1: You told me your wife collapsed. I mean, it's it's horrible.
Speaker 1: Let me let me bring Linda in for a second. Because, um,
Speaker 1: you know this nonprofit group you put, you help put
Speaker 1: this whole thing together. So I gotta give you a
Speaker 1: lot of credit. And it's called Dark Wire, and you
Speaker 1: this is your first documentary. It's not in vain. Sarah
Speaker 1: Carter also is working on the project created by the organization.
Speaker 1: But you also trace where this is all coming from,
Speaker 1: which is a big component of this. I think one
Speaker 1: of the most misunderstood things is that final is coming
Speaker 1: across an open border. It's a national security crisis. What
Speaker 1: person doesn't want to protect their children? And when Eric
Speaker 1: started doing all this stuff, I said, you know, I'm
Speaker 1: doing this project with Sarah Carter. She's a business partner
Speaker 1: in this nonprofit trying to get the word out and
Speaker 1: save some kids. You know, if you take, if you
Speaker 1: want to take an analogy that really hits home, think
Speaker 1: about a seven thirty seven crashing every single day with
Speaker 1: every passenger on the flight dying, except they're all under twenty.
Speaker 1: That's what's happening in our country's opioid losses, over seventy
Speaker 1: people a year. And then we're not even talking about
Speaker 1: the lives ruined by addiction. And that's the thing. We're losing.
Speaker 1: A generation. Babies are being born addicted to heroin and opioids.
Speaker 1: While we were making the film, my cousin overdosed and
Speaker 1: died and she left behind five kids. She had just
Speaker 1: gotten out of rehab, just got clean, was in a
Speaker 1: halfway house, took a shot of heroin. The heroin was
Speaker 1: lace with fentinyl, and she died. And Eric, this is
Speaker 1: what's happening to these kids. Let's say they hit granny's
Speaker 1: medicine cabinet and as a percoset of vicodin an OxyContin,
Speaker 1: and then they take it and then they like it.
Speaker 1: Then they take it and they like it, and the
Speaker 1: next thing they were on the street paying eighty bucks
Speaker 1: a pill and they can't afford it, and then someone
Speaker 1: offers a ten dollar bag of heroin and their life's over.
Speaker 1: Even the work now shanag worse. You're right up until
Speaker 1: the last part where it's it's now cheaper by hit
Speaker 1: an opioid on the street. You can get a pill
Speaker 1: of opioid of whatever it is, oxy whatever their their
Speaker 1: their favorite type of opioid is for five bucks. And
Speaker 1: cops are telling law enforcements tell me we can't we
Speaker 1: can't keep up. It's too hard to find you because
Speaker 1: you can't smell with dogs. They say, for five dollars
Speaker 1: they can get high in an opioid, and they cost
Speaker 1: them more to buy a joint or cocaine, so they're
Speaker 1: of course attracted right to it a stronger stuff. The
Speaker 1: problem is some of the stuff that's on the street.
Speaker 1: A lot of the stuff that's on the street is
Speaker 1: as Linda points out, is coming from places like China,
Speaker 1: North Korea as well, and they're laced with deadly, deadly drawn.
Speaker 1: The fat milk is a horse tranquilizer. They give fet
Speaker 1: mold the people in the last dying days of cancer
Speaker 1: when they're in the massive monster pain and and they
Speaker 1: just they it's the last ditch after to keep people
Speaker 1: out of pain. Problem is, like I said, three granules
Speaker 1: of that idi salt is enough to kill a two
Speaker 1: hundred pound man, and frankly, it's it's killing our youth.
Speaker 1: When that's right, Linda's on it. Thank you for tell
Speaker 1: us about what Thank you. And I know you're going
Speaker 1: to be at the premier of the documentary. I offered,
Speaker 1: but Linda said, no, I don't want you there because
Speaker 1: you'd embarrassed me. Um. Yeah, that's what I said exactly.
Speaker 1: That's a quote. But I'm very proud of you for
Speaker 1: doing this job. And I'm proud of you, know, Sarah
Speaker 1: and the group of people that you put together and
Speaker 1: pulled together. Uh, and you do this all on your own.
Speaker 1: The only idea was offer you know, moral support really
Speaker 1: because I supported the project. Um. And we've been very
Speaker 1: fortunate because we've had people like Eric come on board
Speaker 1: and demil About's mom, Diane Delagard, she's gonna come gona
Speaker 1: come Monday, right, She's coming Monday. She's speaking for the
Speaker 1: first time in an open forum, like you know, on
Speaker 1: a stage with Eric a little bit of course, please Eric, please.
Speaker 1: So so Diane calls me, she says, I had to
Speaker 1: get involved and said we have to do this, but
Speaker 1: we have to do this with with with Demi's consent,
Speaker 1: because she had to all this is all about and
Speaker 1: her recovery. And she said, okay, when we sit down,
Speaker 1: and she sat down with Demi as she started to
Speaker 1: feel better and and and he has fully fully thrown
Speaker 1: her support behind this. Diane said, look, I don't I'm
Speaker 1: not very media savvy. And I said, look, listen to this,
Speaker 1: and I want to walk you through this. It's it's
Speaker 1: it's it's a treachery, it's horror in this for the
Speaker 1: first few times, just to relive some of those moments.
Speaker 1: And and so we're gonna do that. We're gonna hold
Speaker 1: her handle in the slowly bringing into into the media
Speaker 1: spotlight with this and make sure that she doesn't overwhelmed
Speaker 1: by it. But she has a really interesting story too,
Speaker 1: because her daughter was clean for a long time and
Speaker 1: so when about six years six years and then bad people.
Speaker 1: They they're they're throwing a party and Demi's clean at
Speaker 1: the point and there and they throw a party and
Speaker 1: some of the dealers got behind the wall, the security wall.
Speaker 1: They got inside and all it took was one night
Speaker 1: and Demi finds herself literally but literally almost dead, if
Speaker 1: not dead, and they bring her back. So it's so scary,
Speaker 1: so dangerous out there, Sean Um. Now, well, I know
Speaker 1: that you're doing the premiere on Monday, and I think
Speaker 1: it's important for people to see this. And you go
Speaker 1: to a go to um, go to the dark wire
Speaker 1: dot com, the dark wire dot com and we have
Speaker 1: a few seats open. So if you submit your email
Speaker 1: and send it our way, we'll get you into the premiere.
Speaker 1: And then how over time are people going to be
Speaker 1: able to see it? We have an announcement yet, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: so we're gonna be streaming it. We're doing some distribution
Speaker 1: deals on Amazon and other places, and we'll get it
Speaker 1: out there for people to see it. Yeah. You know, Eric,
Speaker 1: I know you don't get I know you never fully recover,
Speaker 1: but I know that both you and your wife you've
Speaker 1: taken what is the most painful experience in life, and
Speaker 1: you've you've now turned it into something that you're trying
Speaker 1: to help save the lives of others. I love you
Speaker 1: for doing that. You're an example to all of us.
Speaker 1: And um, I just wish you and your family you
Speaker 1: know this the best. And it's happening Monday in Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. Not in Vain is the brand new documentary.
Speaker 1: It is a nonprofit group. The dark Wire dot com.
Speaker 1: The dark Wire dot Com. Hannity, Fox News, we got
Speaker 1: great line up for you tonight and have a great weekend.
Speaker 1: We'll see what crazy news comes out by Monday, but
Speaker 1: we'll be on it. We're going back to our nation's
Speaker 1: capital on Monday for this reason.