If you're like me and suffer from insomnia, you know what, that's not fun. You know I tried everything I couldn't get a good night's sleep. And this is neither drug nor alcohol induced. That's right. It is my pillow. Mike Lindell invented it and he fitted me for my first my pillow, and it's changed my life. I fall asleep faster, stay asleep longer, and the good news you can too. Lease go to my pillow dot com promo code Sean and take advantage of one of Mike Glendell's best offers, his Special four pack. You get fifty percent off to my Pillow Premium Pillows to Go Anywhere Pillows. My Pillows made in the USA, has a sixty day unconditional money back guaranteed no risk to you, and attend you warranty. You don't want to spend more sleepless nights on a pillow tossing interney that's not working for you. Just go to my pillow dot com right now, use the promo code Sean and you get Mike Glendell's special four pack. You get to my Pillow Premium Pillows to Go Anywhere Pillows fifty percent off, and you'll start getting the kind of peaceful and RESTful and comfortable and deep, peeling and recrupative sleep you've been craving and deserve. My Pillow dot Com promo coach sewn. Hey, everybody, Happy Friday. This is Greg Jared in for Sean Hannity. This is the Sean Hannity Show, and I'm happy to be with you. Sean certainly deserves a day off after the incredible work he did in London and Helsinki with Lynda in the Whole Gang, and so I'm filling in for him today. And it is perhaps a propitious time for me to be here because my book The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to clear Hillary Clinton and Framed Donald Trump, comes out on Tuesday, July of the next week, so I want to talk about it today. For those of you who don't know who I am, I am a Fox News legal analyst, but I spent fifteen years as a Fox News anchor. Before that, Court TV, MSNBC, I was a lawyer, a defense attorney, a trial attorney back in the nineteen eight d's. Uh, yes, I'm a lawyer. Don't hold it against me because everybody sins. Remember that. So that's my background. And if you want to follow me, my Twitter handle is at greg Jarrett but that's two g s on the end of Greg Jerry gg dot or no, just Jarrett at and then that's Twitter. UM. You can also buy my book in advance of Tuesday. All you have to do is go to Amazon, um dot com obviously Barnes and Noble dot com, or make it easy on yourself and go to Hannity dot com and you can read about me. You can read about my book. You can buy the book in advance, and I think it's worth your while. Yes, I wrote it, but let me give you a little bit of a backstory. So I I have spent the last three or four years writing columns, and many of them about how Hillary Clinton broke the law and yet she was clear beard by James Comey Andrew McKay, Peter Struck Lisa Page at the FBI, end people at the Department of Justice. And on the very same day that Comby announced he was clearing Hillary Clinton, his FBI was meeting secretly in London with the author of the fictitious phony anti Trump dossier, which was funded by Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, and that document, together with many other unfounded accusations, would be exploited in a malicious attempt to frame Donald Trump for unidentified crimes that he never committed, and that was the beginning of the Russia host July two thousand sixteen. Interestingly, James Comey doesn't remember the moment that he decided that Hillary Clinton had committed crimes, and that was one of the more stunning revelations contained in the Department of Justice recent report by the Inspector. Generally, it's worth reading, and if you want to shortcut, just go to roughly page one eight seven of the i G report and read the next ten pages, because here's what you're going to learn. On May second, two thousand sixteen, Comey, then, the FBI Director, sits down at his personal computer and he composes a statement summarizing all of Hillary Clinton's illegality, her mishandling of classified documents, and he concludes in his writing that she was quote unquote grossly negligent. And he wrote it down not once, but he wrote it down twice. Now those words have meaning. They are pivotal words in the law. They are drawn directly from a federal statute eighteen USC. Seven ninety three, making it a felony to handle classified documents in a grossly negligent manner. And so based on that finding by Comey, Clinton should have faced a multiple count criminal indictment that day, since the FBI had discovered that she had stored not one or two, or ten or twelve, but a hundred and twenty hundred and ten classified emails on her unauthorized private computer service. And if you don't think Russia has those hundred and ten classified documents after we now know they also hack the d n C server, then you're smoking something. The Russians have it, the Chinese have it, everybody has it. Because her unauthorized server was available for all to obtain. It was unprotected, and that's why it's against the law for her to have done that. Other people have been prosecuted for similar conduct. The jeopardized national security in violation of the law. And I devote several pages going through each and every one of those individuals in my book, The Russia Hoax comes out on Tuesday. You can order it right now. But why is it that those people were prosecuted and Hillary Clinton wasn't Comey saw to it that no charges would ever be brought against Hillary Clinton. And he had his minions who were on board, Peter Struck, Lisa Page, Andrew mcab the whole gang over at the FBI. So here's what happened. The Inspector General questions Comey about his conduct, and Comey admits to the i G that, yeah, I wrote that may second statement. I penned every word of it myself. But then he offers the most implausible claim I think I've ever heard. And here's a quote from the i G. Comy did not recall that his original draft use the term gross negligence, and he doesn't recall any discussions about that issue. End of quote. James, how perfectly convenient of you. You suffered a complete memory lapse. Now, of course you and I know that Comey's amnesia is utterly preposterous. His perfecty is no surprise. The man is unscrupulous. Look up that word and Comey's picture should be next to it. Comey would have us believe that, as FBI director, he memorialized in print on his computer his conclusion that the leading candidate for president United States committed crimes. And yet, oh, gee, you know I I don't recall that I don't recall writing the incriminating words. I don't recall talking about it with my staff. Yeah, right, James, guess what there are notes. The truth is that Comy does remember what he wrote that Clinton was guilty of crimes, because he participated in subsequent discussions with top officials at the FBI about Clinton's gross negligence and her crimes. Several meetings were held on the subject. Contemporaneous notes proved that Comey was in attendance. Comy participated in those discussions. Those records show that, yes, Comey was convinced that Clinton broke the law, but he was determined that he was going to clear her anyway now in order to achieve that legal somersault, that convicting terminology grow negligence that would have to be stricken from his statement, how else do you absorb, absolve the the soon to be Democratic nominee for President United States. You've got to clear her path to the White House. So this is what happened. June six, the FBI lead investigator on the case, a guy with the name of Peter Struck we all now know him, sits down at his office computer to cleanse the statement of gross negligence. And guess who's there leaning over his shoulder is FBI lawyer Lisa Page. With of course, he's been having an extramarital affair. So the two of them together decide to substitute the words extremely careless to make it appear less criminally culpable. Lisa Page actually told the inspector general quote to use a term that actually has a legal definition would be confusing. Hey, guess what, Lisa Shirley would I mean, how do you clear Clinton by using a phrase that has a legal meaning under the law. So, in other words, this was all just a clever legal charade conjured up by Comey and Struck and Lisa Page to exculpaid Hillary Clinton. And you know there's more to this story. I mean Struck in Page also expunge from Comey's statement his reference to another statute that Clinton had plainly violated. So, with the director's consent, his encouragement, they sanitized his findings of fact, his contortions of of law, and Clinton was free and clear. While the FBI did not even interview her at this stage, how in the world do they know her intent? It was a pre conceived sham, a predetermined outcome. There really was no investigation. It was all a charade, and Comey's machinations are all over the place. He offers to the i G. Another absurd explanation. He says, and this is a quote from the IG report, It was his understanding, based on the statutes legislative history, the Congress intended there to be some level of willfulness under the gross negligence statute. Really, I got news for you, James. You never read the legislative history I did. It's not there. Your statement of the i G is demonstrably untrue because Congress amended the Espionage Act to create this new category called gross negligence, and they specifically decided to eliminate in intent or wilfulness. So Comy just invented this excuse as a ruse to try to avoid charging Clinton. You know, amnesia is clearly contagious over the FBI. Peter Struck during his congressional testimony, pretended he didn't remember making the change on his computer. But guess what he did implicate Comey. Here's a quote. Ultimately, he Comy made the decision to change the wording. A wait a minute, how could Comey order a changing words? He doesn't remember writing. Look, their stories don't match absence some serious dementia, these overt lies or evidence of a conspicuous cover up, And that is just part of the Russia hoax. That was the beginning. And then they get their hands on that anti Trump, phony, fabricated dossier, and the FBI is off to the races. Peter Struck signs the documents launching the Trump Russia collusion probe without necessary facts to justify the probe. They were a never There was never evidence of any crimes to justify a criminal investigation. There was never any intelligence to justify a counter intelligence investigation. They made it up. And then they went to Affis a judge and using this phony dossier, which they knew was fake. Comey later admitted it was unverified. They nevertheless deceived the court. They hid the evidence that Hillary had paid for it, and they obtained a warm rent to spy on the Trump campaign. Well that's just part of the story, and we're gonna be talking a lot about it today because my book comes out on Tuesday. The Russia Hoax, the elicit scheme to clear Hillary Clinton in frame Donald Trump. You can order it on Barnes and Noble dot com, Amazon dot com, Hannity dot com. I'm Greg jarreted in for Sean Hannity. Will pause, take a quick break. We'll be right back with the Sean Hannity Show. Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show on Greg Jared filling in for Sean Today. My book comes out Tuesday, entitled The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton in frame Donald Trump. You can get it in advance on Amazon dot com, Barnes and Noble dot com, or wait till Tuesday and buy it at the stores. Check it out on Hannity dot com. My Twitter handle is at Greg Jarrett. And by the way, we want to hear from you during this hour, so give us a call. I'll talk to you and or your questions. Explains some things, Explain things if you if you don't understand something. Our number is eight hundred nine four one seven, three to six. That's eight hundred nine for one Sean uh. This book is not a defensive Donald Trump. It is a defense of the rule of law, which I believe came under sustained attack by high government officials like Comey and McCabe and Struck and page who abuse their positions of power to subvert our system of justice and undermine the democratic process. And Sean encouraged me to write this book because he'd been reading my columns. He was having me on his show, and he realized, and I think he shared with me how angry we were becoming over the top officials at the FBI and the d o J who were deliberately abusing their offices. They not only absolved Hillary Clinton violating felony statutes as we were talking about moments ago, but these people weaponized the law and regulations to investigate Trump without legal justification why they were trying to destroy him. And as they did that, they compromised essential principles and they damaged the nation's trust. And this is the story of my book, The Russia Hoax, And we want to hear from you, So give us a call eight hundred nine for one, seven three two six Again, that's eight hundred nine for one Sean. I'm Greg Jarrett. You can order the book ahead of time Barnes and Noble dot com, Amazon dot com, go to Hannity dot com. Um, we're gonna pause, take a quick break. Your phone calls on the other side that you can't always believe what the other side claims. That's why there's the Sean Hannity Show. And welcome back to the Sean Hannity Showing. Greg Jared filling in for Sean Hannity. We're gonna take your calls in just a moment. We've been talking about the Russia hoax and that that is actually the title of my book that comes out on Tuesday of next week, July. The subtitle is The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton in frame Donald Trump. You can order it on Barnes and Noble dot com, Amazon dot com, just go to Hannity dot com. The hoax itself is this, there was never any plausible evidence that Donald Trump or anybody in his campaign collaborated with Russia to win the presidency. Zero. There have been a bunch of indictments by Robert Mueller. How many of them, I ask you involve Trump Russia collusion. Let me help you with the answer. The answer, you know it is zero to launch that investigation against the president. Facts were invented or exaggerated, the laws were perverted or ignored, and guess what, the law enforcers became the law breakers and James Comey scheme to trigger the appointment of his longtime friend ally and colleague, Robert Muller is special counsel. That was a devious maneuver by what I think is an unscrewed ulis man. Comey's insinuation when he testified that the president obstructed justice. That was another myth, another canard designed to inflame the liberal mainstream media, and sure enough they became winning accessories. They were only happy to do it. The Russia hoax, the illicit scheme to clare Hillary Clinton in frame Donald Trump. Let's go to our callers right now. Attila joins this from Kawani, Wisconsin. Hi Attila, Hi, so glad to be on the show, and thank you for having me my pleasure. What what do you think of this whole thing. It's a It's a great honor to talk to you. And I'm going to rush out and get your book in our library. Have convinced them to order your book too. But we're already seeing Gregory the dual system of justice which um Podesta gets immunity of now by Mueller right and and um and we have a UM Trump's campaign manager under lock and key for twenty three hours a day that that should tell us all what we need to know about the the corruption that's going on. And now they're trying to go after Jim Jordan's and and get rid of Deva Nunez h what there, it's a it's a head hunting list. You know, I've been a lawyer for forty years or so. I'd have to actually sit down and count them. I passed the bar exam and became a lawyer. In that my numbers are off. I apologize, but um, I have never seen a case in which a prosecutor gives five immunity deals to the associates of the target of an investigation and that prosecutor gets nothing in return. This was the Hillary Clinton case. Oli her pals who were in on it, the mishandling of classified documents, the destruction of documents, UH, the defiance of lawful subpoenas. They all get immunity. Do they testify against Hillary? No, and James Comey. Let two of them actually sit in on Hillary Clinton's FBI interview with Peter Struck and a few other hacks. And you know, she said, I don't recall roughly forty times. The only thing that Hillary Clinton could remember was her name and date of birth, and she probably fudged on the ladder. I mean it was a total charade. And so you know, talk about prosecutorial misconduct and abusive office. That is the prime example. And then those same people conjured out of thin air fake evidence to go after Donald Trump. And my book has seven foot notes. It was originally five pages. We cut it down to about three inter pages. I wrote every page, every word myself. I spent seven hours a day, seven days a week for four months, and then a month worth of revisions and additions. So five months writing this day in and day out, night and day uh. And I'm actually very proud of the result because I think I lay out the meticulous evidence of how our system of justice was abused by people in high positions of power. Until thanks for your call. Let me go to the next caller, lou Is danny By in Connecticut. U, thank you very much for taking the cause. Just to preface my question, which I know you're aware of, I been biting at the bridle. This whole thing has just been a maddening experience to watch from afar, especially having been in law enforcement, to watch the abuses to have worked in the federal Task Force to work in the state task Force. I've done with a lot of law enforcement personnel, and I don't know any of them who would have done what the FBI did. My question is this, we have probable cause if we had a real a G, a real deputy a G that uh, these FBI agents, UH, some management uh, even some of the people on Mueller's side, uh, permitted crimes to take place. Destruction of evidence, uh, whether it's uh witness testimony or hard physical evidence with immunity deals. Yeah, and I know where you're going. And and yeah, for obstruction of justice. I mean, look, an FBI agent can obstruct his own investigation, it's substruction of justice. The FBI director did that, in my judgment, and he's also guilty of a variety of other felony statues, including abuse of power. UH and uh perhaps perjury and Comy himself may well have violated the same Espionage Act UH laws that Hillary Clinton did. I mean, he gave seven presidential memos that he stole from the federal government. He gave at least four of them to somebody who was not authorized to have them, and according to UH, the FBI uh, some of that information was classified. They had to go into the individual's office and to uh to sanitize the office and gather the evidence and documents so that nobody else got their hands on them. What does that tell you? So all of these people could be prosecuted, including James Comey, but you've got to have a an attorney general who has the will and the knowledge to do it, and you don't have that in Jeff Sessions, probably the worst attorney general in modern history. And you've got Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General, who is really running the Department of Justice. And this is a guy who is doing nothing but obstructing the congressional investigations and defining congressional lawful subpoenas. So with those two guys at the top, nothing's going to happen. Let's go to our next caller. Susie joins this from San Antonio, Texas. Susy, Hey, thank you so much for taking my call. Greg Um. I appreciate all that you do and the work that you do. You you certainly are a warrior. My question is this, I uh, I did seventeen years as a federal agent, and it just stuns me that somebody like call me, can stand up and list off this tick off, this list of all the laws that she broke and all the things that she did, but no reasonable prosecutor would take her to take this case. How does that just stop it? How does James call me? Because then even trade Gaudy says, well, you know, um, no reasonable prosecutor will take this case. Why oh that you know that was just a lie? And Comey thought if I say it, you know, people will believe it. Because Comey believes his own press clippings. Uh. You know, Comy thought he was godlike and that he could do anything he wanted and that he knew better than the American citizen ry. And so he didn't want Trump to be president. He wanted Hillary be president. So he was going to save the nation by exonerating Clinton so she could be president and destroy Donald Trump. That that seems to me to be the story of James Comy. And I think he's nothing more than an arrogant, pompous, pretentious fraud. And but listen, when you're the head of the FBI, uh, you have immense power. And he abused that power to clear Clinton and go after Donald Trump. And I'm so glad you brought up the fact that, you know Comy's ridiculous deception. No reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. I got news for him. Prosecutors all over America would have loved to have brought that case against Hillary. And it was a slam dunk. It was right there on her server, hundred and ten classified documents. That's a crime, even you know. Comy himself said in his nonsensical statement that he originally wrote the sheer volume of information that was properly classified as secret at the time it was discussed on emails, supports an inference that the participants were grossly negligent in their handling of that information. That's a quote from James Comy. But because he wanted to clear Hillary Clinton, he struck that from his computer statement, and he probably thought nobody would ever find out. Clinton will become president and it'll be a great secret. Well guess what, she didn't become president and end metadata and computers record everything and maintain everything. And that's part of the evidence against Clinton and against James Comey. Let's go to our next caller, who is Ron from Chicago, Illinois. Hi, Iron, Hi, how are you interesting? Programs, Thank you very much. Why can't Mueller be fired? He can, I understand he can. But why isn't he being fired? Well, I'll tell you why because two reasons. I think. I think Donald Trump believes that he'll be cleared in the end because he knows he never colluded with Russia. So, you know, one can understand why am I going to fire a guy who, in the end cannot possibly come up with any incriminating evidence because it doesn't exist. I mean, if you talk to Donald Trump, he was like, I never talked to anywhere Hillary Clinton was talking with Russians. But he'll say, I never talked to any Russians and I didn't know if anybody in my campaign was talking to Russians. So I didn't colude. Why should I fire a guy? Uh? If I'm completely and utterly innocent. On the other hand, I think that the president realizes that Mueller's out to get him. I mean, the day before Muller was appointed by Rosenstein's special counsel, Mueller was in the Oval Office begging for the job to replace James Comey, is FBI director, to get his old job back, and Donald Trump didn't want him. There's a conflict of interest that demands recusal. You get turned down for a job by the president, and you take a job the next day to investigate the president, the guy who rejected you and turned you down for a job. Not to mention the fact that Mueller is close friends, allies, former colleagues with the key witness in the case, James Comey, And if you look up a code of professional responsibility, not to mention the Department of Justice regulations, it's mandatory. You've got to recuse yourself. You can't prosecute a case when the key witness has a close relationship to you. That's literally word for word, almost word for word, out of the regulations. Uh. So Mueller deserves to be fired. But I think the president probably correctly realizes that within minutes of firing Mueller he'd be accused of being Richard Nixon and Watergate all over, and the firing of Archibald Cox, which eventually unraveled and led to the uh what were articles of impeachment for Nixon and prompted his resignation. So, I mean, the political fallout would be severe. So I think that's the reason why this is Greg Jared filling in for Shawn Hannity on The Sean Hannity Show. We're taking your calls. We're talking about my book, The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to clare Hillary Clinton and framed Donald Trump. It comes out next Tuesday in your local bookstore, but you can order it online Barnes and Noble dot com, Amazon dot com, or just go to Hannity dot com and check out my Twitter handle at Greg jareded. Welcome back to the Shawn Hannity Shawn. Greg Jarrett filling in for Shawn. In just a few minutes, We're gonna be talking to former U S Attorney and former Independent Council Joe Digeneva, one of the finest lawyers in America. I interviewed him for my book and he is quoted in several places. The book comes out Tuesday, The Russia Hoax Barnes and Noble. Amazon will be back in a flash The Sean Hannity Show. Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show on Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity. Um, we are talking a lot about the book that I wrote, which comes out on Tuesday, called The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to clear Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump. It can be ordered pre ordered on Amazon or borns at Noble dot com, or just go to Hannity dot com and there's a link there, and you know, you can read what's in it. But frankly, the title tells the story, but the dirty, disgusting details are on the inside, complete with seven hundred footnotes. So I didn't just make it up like Michael Wolfe. So um. One of the people who was actually quite helpful in UH in my writing the book was, Um, Joe did Jennifer because he granted me an interview, and so uh, several of his comments about the Russia hoax are contained within the book. Now, Joe Digeneva is one of the finest lawyers in all of America, former U S Attorney. He was also and this is what's important, he was also an independent Council, which is the equivalent these days of the Special Council because the Independent Council law was not renewed by Congress, and now Robert Muller under a Special Council regulation, UH is playing that role, though there are very meaningful differences. But let me get Joe on the phone. Now, Joe, thank you so much for joining us today and and once again thank you for agreeing to be interviewed for the book, because I think your comments were an important contribution to the book. Well, Greig, thank you very much. And and first of all, let me congratulate you on the publication of the book. As you know, I've read most of it pre publication. Uh it's a fantastic read. May I tell your your listeners and Sean's listeners, Uh, please get it you you just won't be able to put it down. Well, that's very very kind of you, and I appreciate it immensely. Um, before we talk about some of the things that are in the book, I do want to ask you about some of the latest information that we're now getting. There's a growing number of Democrats who were asking that the interpreter during the Trump Putin meeting. Her name is Marina Gross. They are demanding that she behauled before co Congressional Committee to reveal what was discussed and what she heard during this one on one meeting between two world leaders. And they're also demanding that she turned over to Congress any notes that she took during the Monday to our meeting in Helsinki. Again between Trump and putin your thoughts. Well, first of all, of the Democrats do not control either House of Congress, so their request is a legal mulity. It is nothing more than a request that does not have the force of law. Um. She does not have to respond. The President does not have to respond. No one has to respond. That said, Um. One thing is also clear that if the president needed to, he could invoke executive privilege. Let's say, if the Democrats controlled one of both houses of Congress. But an interpreter is never going to be called to testify. I can assure you that the Democrats ultimately, uh no, they're never going to get her, and so this is just a game because if they thought they would get her, it is quite conceivable that Mr Schumer, no matter how obnoxious he is from time to time, would realize that a future Democratic president would not want this to happen, and so it wouldn't happen. But this is grandstanding Allah, all of the Democrats, this is what they do. They've become a very very bad joke. Well, Um, the liberal media and Democrats, um had you know, there was hair on fire hysteria after the you know, the Putin Trump meeting in the news conference accusing Trump of being soft on Russia and in Putin's pocket. You know, frankly, you know, Jill, that is belied by the facts. This president increased sanctions against Russia fivefold when after their energy sector, the defense industry, Putin's inner circle, and that most recent set of sanctions three months ago in April that the president's side. He issued a statement saying this is in direct punishment for Russia's meddling in the election. You know, as I see a Trump has taken more punitive action against Russia in eighteen months than Obama did in eight years. What do you think. I don't think there's any doubt that the President's conduct, whether it's giving defensive assole systems to Eastern European countries which are now part of the Western Bloc, whether it's giving arms to Ukraine, whatever it may be, the sanctions expelling sixty two Russian quote unquote diplomats who were intelligence people as a result of the poisoning of the former Russian spy in London. The President has been fantastic. His messaging has been a little off from time to time, but in terms of the real activities to punish the Russians. It is absolutely true that compared to uh the abysmal record of President Obama, he has been a superb defender of American interests. And I must say, over the last few days, I've always it's been fairly obvious that John Brennan, the former CIA director under Obama, is a very sick, sick man, a man so partisan, so viciously corrupted by his bias is that he looks like a madman when he's on television, his fiery face. He can barely stay within his skin. But the person who disappointed me even more the other day by suggesting that the Russians might have something on the president was Lehan Panetta. You know, there's a guy who, while Secretary of Defense during Benghazi, did absolutely nothing to save an American ambassador and three other brave Americans. Um. Leon Panetta should be ashamed of himself. And I can't imagine what possessed him to say something as stupid and as uninformed as he did about the current president of the United States. But this is where the Democrats are. They're cowardly. Panetta, by the way, is one of those guys who, for all of his experience as a member of Congress, Secretary of Defense. He I directed, he is really a weak, weak person. It's fascinating how he counted out to Hillary Clinton, quite remarkable. You know, a couple of hours after John Brennan, former CIA director, a Hillary Clinton Lackey and uh, you know, a hyperpartisan uh, tweeted out that the President committed treason. I tweeted a response, and my response was, every time that John Brennan opens his mouth or tweets something, he removes all doubt about his ignorance. And the reason I said that is because the treason laws, as you well know, are very specific in the United States, not only in Article three of the Constitution, but under the Statute of Treason you have to be at war with another country for treason to apply. And the most the most obvious example was Ethel and Julius Rosenberg in the nineties and fifties. They were never charged with trees and even though they gave nuclear secrets to the Soviets, they were charged and convicted and put to death for espionage. But but you know, Brennan and uh, you know, all of the others who hauled off and said this is treason are absolutely ignorant. People that they are. And and the other thing that's very clear about Brennan when you watch him, Uh, it's very Shakespearean in the sense that he does protest too much because he is well aware of the central role that he played in creating the hoax about Russian collusion, in allowing the improper UH searching of FISA information by the n s A. He is at the core of spreading the false dossier around the government in an effort to get it published. He is at the core of the unmasking process with Susan Rice and others. He's at the core of the leaking of all of that information in violation of federal law to the American media. John Brennan is among that homeless Clapper is of course another one. But he's so stupid and and inarticulate that he probably has a defense of being just not quite dumb enough to know how to properly lie. But but, but Brennan is at the center of the entire conspiracy against Trump and and the the the thing about it that makes him so obviously a part of the conspiracy is the the vitriol that he has cloaked himself in to go after a sitting president and the damage that he has done to the c I a personnel who work out there today. They are I speak to people at the agency all the time. They are embarrassed by John Brennan. They are mortally, mortally embarrassed by him. Well, he's a he's a mean and malevolent person. And and don't just take my word for it. That's what Samantha Power, the Obama United Nations Ambassador said, rather cryptically when and I'll quote her, not a good idea to piss off John Brennan. That's in my book. And in fact, as you know, because you've read much of the book, Joe uh my book entitle of the Russia Hoax, Chapter six, the title of that chapter is the fabricated dossier used against Trump. And I opened it with salvos against John Brennan as the instigator of the dirty dossier. And in fact, I quote House Intelligence senior aid House Intelligence Committee senior aide who said, quote John Brennan did more than anyone to promulgate the dirty dossier. He politicized and effectively weaponized what was false intelligence against Trump. And then I lay out all the facts and the evidence that prove it. Yes, and I couldn't agree with you more. I think that that particular chapter is one of the most sterling parts of the book, and I heartily commended to people who want to understand how UH, an outgoing administration during a transition period between an election and an inauguration could engage in such perfidy during that time in an effort to undermine a president, a president duly elected by the people of the United States. I don't you know. I think the American people have figured out without any question that the Russian collusion thing is idiotic and a hoax, except the most part of Democrats, who will believe anything because they hate the president. But what what people are not aware of is how criminal, and I underscore criminal the activity was that led to the to the attempt to frame Donald Trump. They will not succeed, the president will not be framed, but they have done a terrible thing to the American people into a new president. They've stolen eighteen months of his presidency to deal with this nonsense. And at the core of that were the people, the senior people in intelligence of the Obama administration, who I believe engaged in completely criminal activity that should be investigated I'm I am regretted. I regret to say that Jeff Sessions as Attorney General will never permit the type of in depth criminal investigation that needs to I agree with the Joe Geneva. You're gonna stick around for just a moment because we're gonna squeeze in a quick break. I have many more questions for you, the great attorney Joe di Jenova, who is in the book The Russia Hoax. You can buy it on Tuesday. I'll be right back. This is Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity on the Sean Hannity Show. Back Now with the Sean Hannity Show. I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity. You can follow me on Twitter, Greg Jarrett Um at Greg Jarrett and by the way to G's on the end of Greg not to be confused without other Greg Jarrett Um. I've been talking with Jojo Jeneva, terrific lawyer in Washington, d C. Former U S Attorney, former Independent Council. He was interviewed for my book. He has quoted in it. The name of the book is The Russia Hoax, The illicit scheme to clear Hillary Clinton. And framed Donald Trump, available in bookstores beginning on Tuesday, or you can order it Barnes and Noble dot com. But Joe, one of the arguments I make, uh, this is in I believe chapter six, is that you know, collusion is not a crime in a political campaign. Collusions crime and anti trust law and so forth. Um, Now, if you pay a foreign national for information in a political campaign, that would be a crime. And isn't that what Hillary Clinton and Democrats did? Well, Gregg, the answer to that is, of course yes, what they did was definitely pay a foreign national for information in the campaign. And the question is whether or not that type of activity uh is covered by federal criminal one should be investigated. But here's here's the problem with all of this, and the problem with the Muller investigation, which was created by Rod Rosenstein because he was so furious about the fact that he thought the President of the United States had embarrassed him by telling Lester Holt that it would have fired James Comy no matter what, no matter what Rosenstein had recommended. Rosenstein is just a coward. And the the problem that exists now is if it is true that Bob Mullard has immunized Tony Podesta as part of the prosecution of Paul Manafort. We will have reached the point in this ridiculous Muller investigation of complete perfidy, complete untrustworthiness. Can just just put your but just put your head on straight for a second and think about what that means. That means that every Democrat who has been investigated by the Comy Justice Department, Comy FBI has gotten either immunity or a no prosecution decision. Can in the middle of the Maniford case, They're going to immunize Tony Podesta, who committed many of the same crimes that that that that Manafort is alleged to have done. It is. It is so mind boggling and shocking that I'm apoplectic about Joe di Jeneva. Many thanks. Let's do it again sometime soon, one of the great attorneys in America. Talking about my book, The Russia Hoax, which comes out on Tuesday. We'll be right back. Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show. I'm Greg Jared filling in for Sean Hannity. We've been talking a lot about my book, The Russia Hoax, The illicit scheme to clear Hillary Clinton and framed Donald Trump. It comes out this coming Tuesday, July, but you can, you know, order it ahead of time on Barnes and Noble dot com, Amazon dot com, or just go to Hannity dot com. But the you know, look, the title tells this story. The whole Russia Trump Russia collusion was nothing but a hoax. There was never any evidence of it. It was a legally unjustified investigation of the president after Comy and Company cleared Hillary Clinton purely for political reasons, because she obviously violated the criminal statutes and should have been indicted and prosecuted. But that, of course is not what the FBI and the Department of Justice and the Obama administration wanted, and the President himself, in a April two thousand sixteen interview on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, Um basically directed the FBI to clip Hillary Clinton. Uh. He told Chris Wallace that she didn't intend to violate the law or jeopardize national security, and that she was merely careless. And you know, within six weeks they changed Comey's statement from gross negligence, which is a clear violation under the Felony Statute to Obama's word carelessness. So the president all but instructed them. He did it through the media to clear Hillary Clinton. Did anybody accuse Barack Obama of obstruction of justice? Of course not, but the president exercises his constitutional right to fire James Comey in My Lord Its obstruction of justice. Joining us now to talk about the book and other things, Sarah Carter, Fox News contributor and intrepid investigative reporter and one of my favorite people to be on with. And David Shown, who is a terrific lawyer of civil liberties attorney. Uh and I always learned something when I tune into David when he's on or talked to him. So thank you both for being with us. And let me ask you about the most recent news that came out today. This is going to of course change the immediate news cycle yet again, that Michael Cohen taped his conversation with President Trump regarding a potential future payment to Karen McDougall, who is a playboy playmate who allegedly had an affair with Trump many years ago. And apparently, you know, she wanted to get her greedy hands on a few green backs, and there was a discussion that took place. David, since you're the lawyer, let me go to you. Is there any anything illegal or criminal about paying somebody to go away? Absolutely not, And as you well know, Greg, it happens every day and settlements across the country and all kinds of civil cases. I think the greatest importance this revelation has probably gives uh more entertainment value at the checkout counter and the grocery store. Now, I sort of put it in the Kardashian Paris Hilton category of news. The only issue they try to make a potentially one can see is that this was somehow a payment to affect the election. He was paying hush money or authorizing the payment of hush money to the person who had bad news it might impact on the election. It's absolute nonsense enough. It's not just nonsense. It's offensive to the American voters to suggest that the voters in this country based their sacred vote for president on either Russian propaganda or a calculus as to whether the president for potential president had an affair or didn't have an affair. And we know, I mean from history, that those facts only go so far. We don't have to look any further than President Clinton and his popularity when you know that's the proven fact about the fear. But it's really offensive to American people, and as offensive American people to keep spending money chasing these things down. I understand it's a sexy story. Um. And by the way, the story itself, of course raises so many issues about why it was taped. What that does is professional standing, Um, all of these kind of who leaked it, what agent seized it. Of course, the d o j U regulations prohibit an agent involved an investigation from seizing items from a lawyer's office supposed to be a tape team going in. So there are all kinds of issues. But yeah, anyway, that's a lot of it is covered by attorney client privilege. That privilege, by the way, is not held by Michael Cohen, but by the client, which would have been Donald Trump. Only he can waive the privilege. I suspect. I mean, the information we're getting is that Cohen's lawyers, coming through files, saw this conversation. They alerted the president's legal team and they probably said, you know what, there's no they're they're uh, no, need to hide it. It'll be leaked by the Department of Justice anyway, so we might as well get ahead of the story and reported ourselves and and tell the truth about it. Sarah Carter, you know, this whole business about you know, affairs and payments and so forth, and that was largely baked into the media narrative before the election anyway, they were. And this is about character assassination, right, and disinformation campaigns that we've seen with the Russia alleged Russia collusion. Now we have this, this, this this is part of a character assassination campaign against President Trump. And if we looked through history, as you know David shown so rightly put it, we've seen this over and over again. I mean, it is a sexy story people wanted out there. I think my concern Greg was looking at the fact of you know, attorney clients privilege, wondering how many more recordings you know, Michael Cohen has or other clients that he may have recorded um and also how did it leak when you mentioned to the Department of Justice. Of course there are guidelines that must be followed, and you think, well, then who in the d J had access to this, leak to this where their copies made? Could this have been a separate copy of the Michael coentide. Could it have come from somebody else that would have been interesting as well. So there's a lot of questions here, a lot of questions that need to be answered, and likely more than likely this has nothing. I mean, there's nothing criminal here, there's no issues here of that nature. It certainly will uh drive home for the mainstream media this continues push to go after President Trump, and of course people are going to look at it. It's important. I mean, it's a story, it's out there. Um. And now it's going to be up to the White House and up to the administration to decide how they are going to handle this and how they're going to move forward with this, because it's certainly something that's going to take up a lot of air time, you know. Um, And go ahead, David, go ahead. I just want to jump in two things. And Sarah's absolutely right, She's hit all the issues as always. I think I sort of wish that Mr Giuliani would stop commenting substantively about this tape or anything else. I'm sure he knows what he's doing, etcetera. I don't want there to be somebody claiming an issue of waver, etcetera. He doesn't speak for the president's pres you said, if the president's bably just number one, but number two. As you know, Greg and Sarah, in these tape cases, what can be the most vitally important evidence, if there is any issue at all, is what wasn't taped? What conversations went on that weren't tape Because remember, Michael Cohen or whoever it is doing the taping, controls what to tape and when to tape it and when to turn it off. So if the president, for example, said I won't be a part of any kind of hush money thing. I don't want this to look like it's hush money, and that wasn't taped, that's obviously the key bit of evidence. And all people hear what thus on the tape. Let me turn to another story that's coming out here, Sarah. Judicial Watch Today expects the Department of Justice release some redacted documents about the infamous FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. Uh and and how it was hidden in footnotes that the unverified dossier was actually paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. What do you know, Well, it's yeah, this is what they've been waiting for Without judicial watch, Gregg, I think that a lot of us would be left blinded. I mean, they really have had the power to fight back the federal government in court. This is the this Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to spy on Carter Page. The fact that they did hide that in the footnote it was not overtly obvious to the court, was something that was deeply concerning. In fact, they didn't lay out they just said opposition. I mean, it was very it was very small. It wasn't the footnote. It didn't lay out that it was Hillary Clinton, it didn't detail the campaign. So it is very court and it's vital. It's vital that those documents be released so that the public can see what was going on. Secondly, I think it's also vital and very important that the nineteen pages of the last vice, the warrant that was taken out on Carter Page, that would be the one that was signed by Rod Rosenstein, that those documents also be turned over to the public. Remember their nineteen pages. Now, the House Intelligence Committee, some members there have actually viewed these documents. They believe that it's important for the public to view these documents. But what's happened is the Department of Justice has basically put a news around their neck not allowing them to release any of these documents. The President would be the only person right now that could authorize that release. You know, we did get some of the visa documents through the release b Congress House Intelligence Committee and some memos from the Senate side, and in fact, David in my book on page one fifty nine. Uh. My book, by the way, is called The Russia Hoax. It's out on Tuesday, or you can preorder it on Barnes and Noble and Amazon dot com. But on page one nine, I recite verbatim, uh, footnote number eight, in which the government, the Department of Justice, and the FBI absolutely disguised and buried who paid for the anti tromphony dossier. We now know it was Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democrats, And so I recite that entire footnote on page one nine. And not long ago, my wife read the book for the first time and she got to that page and she read that footnote and she turned to me. We're on a plane, and she said, are you kidding me? No one in their right mind could discern from that footnote that at the sourcing for the dossier came from the Clinton campaign and Democrats. And it's true, isn't it, David? Yes, it is. And anyone in the right mind better read your book from cover to cover and not just that page if they honestly want to know what happened here, because you folks have been reporting on this stuff in detail that nobody else has reported on. And if you're interested in the facts, read the book and get effects and listen in every day. Um, listen, you know, back to the documents. Remember, as you reported on this show. Uh, the FISA Court presiding judge herself said in alan to Congress, there is no bar to the Department of Justice turning over these application documents. We suggest you go to the Department of Justice and get it from them, and of the the American people deserve it. Yes, absolutely, Um, all right, we're with Sarah Carter, the terrific Fox News contributor, investigative reporter. David Shown, one of the best lawyers in America, civil liberties attorney. These are two of the people that I think know a great deal about the Russia hoax. The title of my book, The Illicit Scheme to clear Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump. UM, you guys are good enough to stick around for after the break, We're gonna squeeze one in right here. Uh. This is Greg Jared. I'm filling in for Sean Hannity on The Sean Hannity Show. Follow me on Twitter, Greg Jared at Greg Jarrett two g's on the end of Greg Uh. And you can buy my book in advance Barnes and Noble dot com, Amazon dot com, or just go to Hennity dot com. It's called The Russia Hoax. I think it'll be worth your while. We'll be right back. Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Shown. Greg Jared in for Shawn Today. We've been talking about my book comes out Tuesday, called The Russia Hoax. Get it on Barnes and Noble or Amazon dot com. Final thoughts now with Sarah Carter and David Showing. Sarah Well, I we've got to keep our eyes on the price. I'm very excited about your book, Greg, I can't wait to read through the whole thing. I'm I'm waiting for a two time to my home. But as part of this investigation is considered, I think the most important thing we need to be looking for is if and when Congress moves forward with this investigation, will those documents be exposed, will we see what actually took place? And I think more importantly, will the president decide eventually to release those documents? Can be classify some of the documents that Congress has been requesting so that the public can know the truth. All right, Sarah, your book, by the way, arrives fed X tomorrow morning. Beyond the lookout, David, I've got to shoot one off to you FedEx. But your final thoughts okay, I can't wait to get the book. Look. My final thoughts are, let's not let's this coin sillationous incident and uh Helsinki derail the focus from Stroke and Page and Mueller st two of the larger just disgraces our government has had in many recent years. Maybe an equal disgrace to the performance of the Democrats on both committees. Who should have been outraged, who should have not taken the position The end justifies the means. But who's Jackson, Lee and Nadler speak out of government misconduct, but not when President Trump is the victim of it. Shameful them. Let's get back to focusing on what damage was done by this horrible misconduct and what damage is still being done. Yeah, Sarah Carter, Uh, David show and thank you both. And you know, Sarah, your books arriving tomorrow. David, I'm gonna put one in the mail. I'm gonna put one in the mail to you today. Thank you both for being with us today. The book is called The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to clear Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump. I spent four months writing it, another month worth of revisions. It is very, very detailed, complete with roughly seven footnotes. Uh. And I think you'll learn a lot that hasn't been revealed or those things that were buried are brought to light. I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity. This is the Sean Hannity Show. We'll be right back. Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show. I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity, who richly deserves the day off after all of his hard work and UH exemplary coverage abroad the Helsinki meeting between President Trump and Vladimir Putin UM and it gives me an opportunity to talk a little bit about the book that I wrote, The Russia Hoax, which comes out next Tuesday. The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to clear Hillary Clinton in Framed Donald Trump in bookstores Tuesday, but you can buy it on Amazon dot com or Barnes and Noble dot com or go to uh Hannity dot com. There's a link there as well. You can follow me on Twitter at Greg Jarrett. One of the people who has really been instrumental in uncovering the Russia Hoax and the machinations of the Department of Justice and the FBI there abuse of power, uh, subverting the rule of law and attempting to undermine democracy in an election. Is one of the best members of Congress. Uh, he's a good editorial candidate. In Florida Freedom Caucus Member Congressman Ronds Santis of Florida joins us in Congressman, thanks for being with us today, Thanks for having me, and congrats on the book. I know it'll do very well down here. Well, I sent you one, and uh, I think you will get it either today or tomorrow or you know, maybe Monday, and I hope you'll read it. Um. There is a lot in there about not just how James Comey and company wrongfully and I think illegally cleared Hillary Clinton. But then how they conjured a case against Donald Trump for Trump Russian collusion without any evidence, without any facts, in violation of what's called the diogue, which is basically the handbook that guides the conduct of the FBI, not to mention the Department of Justice regulations that guide them as well. There was never any evidence to justify a criminal investigation. There was never any intelligence, as Devon Noons of the House Intelligence Committee found to justify a counter intelligence probe. And nevertheless, Comey and others launched this dilating investigation of the president, I believe in order to uh, first of all, defeat him as a candidate, and when that failed to destroy him as president of the United States, How concerned are you about the corrupt behavior of top officials of the FBI and the Department of Justice. Well, just think about the timeline here. Uh, Donald Trump wins the Indiana primary in the spring of what does Peter Strap text to his lover Lisa Page. He says, now the pressure really builds for us to finish midyear exam, which was the Clinton investigation. Why would Trump's victory build pressure to finish that. I mean, if if you were if she was guilty, and then you would need to take that. But he basically was instrumental in helping bring that to a conclusion where Hillary face no charges. He was edited the COMY statement months before they interviewed Hillary, so he was involved in that whole show. Lisa Page is obviously texting him saying, Hey, don't go in there with Hillary with guns blaze. She's going to be the next president. Remember, So at every step in that investigation they bent over backwards not to make a case against there. Then what happened They Comy does the press conference, the infamous press conference. By the end of that same month, in July, Peter Struck is the one opening up what was called crossfire Hurricane, the Trump Russia collusion case, based on what, as you said, Greg, no foreign intelligence and they've not been willing to give us the documents to substantiate why they did it. I think the reason they did it was because of Papadopoulos making this comment that that the Russian ted dirt on Hillary. Alexander Downer provided that info to the Obama State Department, and I think the information came from State Department. Even Alexander Downer, though says he never mentioned anything about email. So Struck's view, I think is, hey, we heard that Trump's campaign man inside knowledge about hacking Hillary's emails. Therefore we opened this and that's not true. There was no facts to do it. So what does he do after he opens the case. Eight days later, he's texting Lisa Page saying, no, Trump won't be president because we will stop it. We'll stop it at the FBI, And of course we know. A week after that was the infamous insurance Policy tech where he said that we can't take the risk of a Trump presidency. And the thing that I think was interesting and we got this when we had Struck come in, is you know, when Mueller was appointed, he texted Lisa Paid saying he was really concerned that there was no there there in the investigation. And you think you're accusing the guy of colluding with a foreign power, and you're concerned there's no there there, you should be happy there's no there there. He wanted, they wanted to go after him from day one, and that's what they did. And I think it was an abuse of the counterintelligence powers of the federal government. And I think that that's going to cause Congress to have to go back and look at how some of this is handled against people who are US citizens domestically. You know. Peter Struck when he testified, UM said, well, those text messages didn't really mean what they say. We're getting some reporting now from fairly reliable sources that Lisa Page and here behind closed doors deposition. Uh said, no, some of those messages meant exactly what they said. What do you think, Yeah, No, I think I think Lisa Page was much more honest about it. And here's the thing with Struck. He gave the same explanations to the i G that he gave to Congress publicly, and the i G said his explanations weren't credible. David Horowitz, who's not a not a Republican, Michael Horritz, Sorry, he's not a Republican, and uh, they didn't find it credible. Americans didn't find it credible. I mean, think about it. Greg, She's saying Trump can't be president, right right right? He responds, no, no, he can't, will stop him and structs explanation for that is, well, I meant the American people to vote, would stop him, and that just defies credulity. I mean, he was saying, we at the FBI will stop him. Same thing with the insurance policy text. It's obvious. And I think Page was smart enough to not try to lie about that and then just beyond it. Of course, you know, I think she was obviously very biased against Trump. But but uh, Struck was really in a position to use his bias in ways that Page probably wasn't. So I think she probably has less exposure than been Struck does. But man, his explanations, I don't think people viewed those as worth worth worth anything. And I think he really hurt himself with his performance in front of the Congress. You know, he seems to have suffered from acute amnesia. He doesn't really remember changing Comey's statement of Clinton's conduct from gross negligence to extremely careless, even though the meta data on his computer shows he made the change. And then he also said, well, I don't really remember writing that text message that we're gonna stop Trump, and then he went on to explain what it meant even though he didn't remember it. Uh. And and you know what also struck me is that he said, and I'm I'm looking at Oh, here it is. He had the audacity. This is Peter Struck to say, quote, I do not have bias. He later then testified those text messages are not indicative of bias, you know, which must mean the earth is flat and picks can fly. I mean, nobody with an ounce of intelligence congressman could possibly buy the self serving rubbish that Peter Struck was peddling in that, by the way, includes the Inspector General, who, after his investigation wrote, I think it's page my memory serves me correctly or thereabouts. He said, quote the struct page communications are not only indicative of a biased state of mind, but imply a willingness to take action to impact a presidential candidates electoral process. Is there any doubt in your mind that they did use their positions of power to take official action to try to alter the events. No. In fact, in Horwits even admitted when I questioned him, if you look at what happened after Struck opens the counter intelligence investigation, we then have the surfacing of the Anthony Weener emails in September of so right in the home stretch of the election, and Struck he refused to really pursue that because he was so worried about this collusion investigation that he had concocted. And Horowitz said that structs explanation for his conduct was not credible and that the most reasonable inference was that it was his bias that was causing him to slow walk the Hillary stuff and focus on Trump. And I think it dovetails. I think his actions throughout both investigations really dovetail with his bias. And yes, how absurd is it to say that you're not biased with stuff like that? He tried to say, Look, we're allowed to have political opinion. I mean, Greg, it's like if you were and I were in the FBI and you and I debated like the merits of a tax reform proposal. Uh, he's trying to say what he was saying as a kin to that, I can give me a break. That was not just a political opinion. That was a deep seated animus that he had towards Donald Trump. And look, it would be one thing if there was evidence. Obvious evidence is why you should start investigation. But makes it so troubling is even after us asking all this time, why did you do it? You know what we're left with is Papadopolis and a and a Steel dossier that was funded by Hillary. Uh. That's just not acceptable in the United States of America. Well, the great irony is that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee paid money to a foreign national, which I view as a violation of the Federal Campaign Election Act. Uh. And yet there's no investigation of her for that. Uh, there's no potential prosecution of her for that. Uh. And an associate, juxtaposed this, an associated Donald Trump uh and his son uh, you know, meet with a Russian lawyer. No money has exchanged, no information ended up being handed over, But somehow talking to a Russian is a crime. And by the way, if you look up on the website, the Federal Luck Commission Election Commission's website, they say foreign nationals are permitted to participate in American political campaigns. They can attend meeting, provide information, you know, they can talk as long as money is an exchange. But the media and Democrats have that as a crime. But it's not criminal for Hillary Clinton to pay money to a foreign national to trash Donald Trump. And also, I mean, what are they that whatever information steal got that he got for free? I mean, Christopher Steele almost assuredly had to pay some of that money to some of these Russians that he was getting information from it, Like it wasn't credible information, but he was getting it from somewhere. He was getting this innuendo. So I think the money that Hillary paid to Perkins Coohee, who then paid Fusion and then paid Steel, I think some of that money ultimately ended up in the hands of some Russians. And so yeah, it's it's absolutely ridiculous they were paying for for opposition research. If some Russian national had just come to their campaign and said they had dirt on Trump, they would have taken the meeting in a minute. We all know that. So it's just, uh, it's hypocrisy. But the media, I think with all this Russia stuff, you know, this is the horse they want to ride, and they've been riding it for a year and a half now and they're continuing to do it, and they're going to try to blow anything they can out of proportion so it fits their narrative. We're talking with Congressman Ron de sandis also a good editorial candidate in Florida. Um, he's gonna stick around for just a minute. We're gonna squeeze in a quick break and we're gonna continue talking about what's in my book. And we've been doing that. The Russia Hoax, The Elicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton in Frame Donald Trump, available in bookstores on Tuesday. You can buy it now on Amazon dot com and Barnes and Noble dot com, or go to Hannity dot com. There's a link there as well. I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity. We'll be back. Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Showing. Greg jareded filling in for Sean Hannity and our guest today talking about my book. Uh, it's called The Russia Hoax, The Elicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Framed Donald Trump. It's out next Tuesday. You can get it at your local bookstore, order it on Barnes and Noble dot com or Amazon dot com, or go to Hannity dot com and follow me on Twitter at Greg jarted. But we've been talking about it with Congressman Ron de Santis of Florida. He's running for governor down there. He's a member of the Freedom Caucus and he has been instrumental in attempting to uncover the wrong full as by many people at the FBI and the Department of Justice and Congressman All along the way, the FBI and the d o J, and in particular Rod Rosenstein have been resisting and obstructing and defining lawful subpoenas. So where are you in all of that? Look, Greg, we have to set a sanction for non compliance, and basically we've gone back and forth. I think what you do is when you have a deadline, you say the next day will be a contempt of congress hearing if you don't produce what we need to produce. I mean, this is step that we're clearly entitled to. I we we're conducting oversight over potential abuse of the government's counterintelligence powers. That is, if that's not right for congressional oversight, I don't know what is. And I think that Rosenstein has has stone walled, and I think they are trying to run the clock out, as Devin Nuna said. So it's something we got to do this soon, though, and I think we've waited too long. So I'm in favor of imposing some penalties here so that we can finally get them to comply. I mean, we're looking specifically to the two things we need, I think right now are the information about why struck open the counter intelligence investigation against Trump's campaign, what was underlying reason the different any documents that were produced with that, And then any documents involving any other contact between any type of FBI informant and the Trump campaign proceeding July thirty one. And we know there was some contact, so someone likes to find howper potentially others, what did the FBI do, if anything, to initiate contact. Alright, Rhonda Santa's congressman from Florida, giveatorial candidate there. Thank you very much for being with us today. I'm Greg Jarrett filling in for Sean Hannity on the Sean Hannity Show. My book comes out Tuesday, The Russia Hoax. I hope you'll buy it and read it. Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show on Greg Jared filling in for Sean today. Uh, my book comes out, The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to clear Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump. This coming Tuesday, July four. I started writing this in December, uh, and I wrote seven hours a day, seven days a week until I finished in late April, then spent the month of May rewriting, adding things because so much was happening while I was writing the book, so additions and revisions had to be made. It went to print the first week of June, and it's already out at the bookstores at Barnes and Noble and Costco and Target and Sam's Club and you know all the places you want to pick up a book, or you can just order it Amazon dot com, Barnes and Noble dot com, go to Hannity dot com. There's a link there, and you don't even have to leave the comfort of your home. It will be delivered to your doorstep. And then you can sit down and read the three hundred pages of the Russia Hoax. And so what does it tell you? Well, I reveal that those within the FBI and Barack Obama's Department of Justice worked not just improperly, but I believe illegally to support the election of Hillary Clinton and defeat Donald Trump in the two thousand sixteen presidential election. And it failed. So those same people, undeterred by the law, decided to contrive an investigation of President Trump. The so called collusion in an attempt to undo the election results and remove him as president. Why because these people were so arrogant that they believe that the American public, that's you, the listeners, didn't know enough, didn't know any better. Uh, you know, you're deplorable, and you couldn't possibly think with that brain of yours to make a proper decision as to who should be the president of the United States. And when you chose Donald Trump, guys like James Comey and Peter Strock and Andrew McCabe and the whole gang over the FBI and others like Bruce Lore at the Department of Justice, with the help of the money of Hillary Clinton, win after Donald Trump with a vengeance to destroy him. And the evidence is compelling that these part Wison's within the FBI and the Department of Justice, driven by you know, this personal animus and a misplaced sense of political righteousness, covertly surreptitiously acted to subvert electoral democracy in our country. And I am absolutely convinced, and the evidence in my book I believe will persuade you that this is the biggest political scandal and the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on Americans in modern history and maybe in all of history. We're taking your phone calls, and I appreciate your support on this book. People have been buying it. We've been doing well on the pre orders on Amazon dot com and Barnes and Noble dot com. And I appreciate your support. You've been very kind people sending me messages encouraging me through the process of writing the book. And now when it's about to come out next Tuesday, let's go to a Doug in Michigan who's been holding and standing by. And Doug, thanks for your patients. What do you think? Hi? Greg? Um, I really appreciate talking to you. Your true warrior is some that said earlier, and I appreciate you standing up for truth justice in the American way. UM. My thought is you are really good at explaining things for late people. And what I'm worried about and wonder about is why Devin Newness and the Oversight Committee don't just charge these people in the d o J and FBI with contempted instruction and yet a warrant or whatever with maybe federal marshals or whoever they would have and pull a Muller and go in and grab the documentation they need and put an end to this forever drama that's been going on. Is there some rule or law or stipulations that they can't just go ahead and do that? There is. You know, while Congress does how of the power of contempt under the law, they do not have the power to enforce contempt with punishment. They instead have to go to another branch of government, the judiciary, and they would have to go since their Congress is in Washington, d C. They would have to go to a federal judge in that jurisdiction UH and seek enforcement of their contempt citation. Now, look in a lot of jurisdictions where I used to practice law back in the eighties in California. You know, if you defied a lawful subpoena and there there'd be a bench warrant issued by a judge without a hearing for your arrest, and thereafter there'd be a here what's called a show cause hearing, the show cause why you should not be held in contempt. And there are very few excuses for defining a subpoena. I used to issue subpoenas as a lawyer in the cases in which I was handling, and people rarely defied a subpoena, but when they did, I went to a judge, it was enforced, and that individual invariably ended up in the hoost goal without a toothbrush. And unfortunately, in Washington, d C. The courts, the federal courts are populated by a bunch of bleeding heart, whiny liberals and oh, you know, can't we work this out. I don't want to throw anybody in jail. Kumbayah. And that's the kind of response you get there. And so you know, we can all feel the pain of members of Congress. They have two steps. They have to first vote for contempt, which would you know, be a majority in the House of Representatives. Then they got to go and enforce the contempt citation, one of the other things they could do. And they, you know, they've drawn up some articles of impeachment for folks like Rod Rosenstein. But the trouble is, you've gotta you gotta get the House to vote by a majority for impeachment, and then the trial for impeachment is in the Senate. You've got to get two thirds and with Democrats there, you just not gonna get it done. So their only avenue. Their only recourse is to go to a federal judge. And good luck in in Washington, d C. So these folks are handcuffed in really trying to pursue the defiance of the law by Rod Rosenstein and Christopher Ray and others. But great question, Doug, Thanks very much. Let's go to Mike in Virginia has been standing by, and Mike, thank you for being with us. No problem, Greg, and I think so much for taking my call today. I listen to Sean Show pretty much every day during the week. That's like I do with Russian limba Um. I'm a disabled veteran, and I wanted to focus primarily on the upcoming election in November, and I've been't I've been voting Republicans since I was eighteen years old, that's thirty years ago this year, and I'm gonna be voting republic Can across the word. I also heard your discussion there with Congressman to Santus in Florida, and best of luck to him and his governor campaign down there. But the Democrats, obviously they have no clue, they have no plan. All they want to do is chirp and complain like crazy. That President Trump had you know, has done this and has done that wrong. And this hoax you've been talking about, that's all it is. I'm convinced one the percented as a hoax. And and also to everything that he's done to the veterans. I mean, I can't say enough about it. And of course I've been retired for the last eight years myself, and uh, and I'm almost very proud to be a Republican and I will always vote that way. I'll be doing again here in Virginia this November, and I'll be voting some Democrats because I get, like the congressman said there in your interview with him, they are nothing but first class. Yeah, and I listen, I agree with you, and God bless you. Um. And you know, we are so appreciative to you. Thank you for your service in our military. UM. And I think you you raise a really great point. UM. I think there's gonna be a red wave in November. And here's why Democrats are moving more and more and more to the left. Prime example, the young woman twenty eight years old in New York who won the you know, Democratic primary for a House seat, so she's a shoe in to be a member of Congress. Her name is Alexandro CaCO Cortez. She is the new fresh face of the increasingly progressive Liberal Democratic Party, and in fact, she's out campaigning with Bernie Sanders today. God bless them, the two socialists together. And you know, if this continues, this will be an early Christmas gift to Republicans. You know, thanks to innumerable television appearances, Democrats are now being asked about, you know, their new their new star in the party, okay, Ceo Cortez. And what they're finding is that she is profoundly ignorant of basic facts of both history and current events. Her full throated embrace of socialism that's troubling enough for Democrats, but her tortured explanation of what America is all about is now branding all Democrats as obtuse. And now it's a debate over capitalism versus socialism at a time when the capitalism markets, market economies are booming. The socialist experience is nothing more than a model for failure. In history tells us capitalism equals prosperity. We're seeing that now. But of course all of that is lost in the likes of Okasio Cortez. And Bernie Sanders, and you know, the whole the whole gang of progressive you know, the warrant. Senator Warren is also one of them. And these are the leaders of the Democratic Party. Let me give you an example of the stupidity of Ocasio Cortez. She said the other day, and this is a quote. Capitalism is not always existed in the world. End of quote. Hello, that's wrong. Capitalism has been around since people were living in caves engaging in primitive trade. Okasio Cortez then said, quote, when this country started, we did not operate on a capitalist economy. Really did Did you ever go to Civics class in high school? We didn't have a capitalist economy when the nation began them what was it? Let me tell you something. Capitalism came to America on board ships. The Quakers, the Puritans, the Virginians, they all extolled market economies. They came to America because it had an abundance of land which they settled and they developed. It was largely an agrarian form of capitalism. Crops were, you know, planted and harvested and traded and sold. There were competitive markets supplying demand, wages, abundant trade. These are all harror marks of capitalism, and it thrived and grew. The initial stages of the Industrial Revolution took place shortly after the Constitutional Convention and the inauguration of President George Washington. You know, to Ocasio Martin Cortez, I would say, read a book, for God's sakes, and I'd be happy to loan you the wonderful book by Ron Cher, now entitled Washington. It's about George Washington, the beginning of our nation, the Revolutionary War, what Americans fought and died for freedom and a capitalist market economy of their own and not just purely British, and the Constitutional Convention are esteemed Constitution and the Bill of Rights, his eight years George Washington as President of the United States. I don't think Ocasio Cortes has ever read a book about American history, because she exhibits nothing but conspicuous ignorance about it. Here's another example. She said again, this is Alexandria okay is deo Cortez, you know, who won the House Democratic primary in New York. She said, quote, unemployment is low because people have two jobs. Really, are you that obtuse? The Labor Department calculates the unemployment figure Alexandra by taking in the number of those without jobs and they divided by the labor force total. Here's the thing. Ocasio Cortez represents the need for an intelligence test before somebody has ever allowed to run and hold public office. She would surely funk a basic high school civics examination. For now, Democrats are stuck with their falling star and Republicans maybe the benefici arays, whatever your calls on the other side. I'm Greg Jared filling in for Sean Hannity. This is the Sean Hannity Show. Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Showing. Greg Jared filling in for Sean Hannity. And it has been a stupendous three hours filling in for Sean today. We spent most of it talking about my book, which comes out next Tuesday, the Russia hoax, the illicit scheme to clear Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump. And I want to thank all the people who have sent me messages of encouragement and support. Our callers today, our guests today, Joe Degenevis, Sarah Carter, David Sean, uh Congressman Rond De sant As, You've all been terrific. I hope you'll go out and buy my book Barnes and Noble dot com, Amazon dot com, or go to Hannity dot com. Please buy the book. I think you'll enjoy it. Have a great weekend everyone,