All right, thanks Scott Shanning. Gladya with US evidence election fraud grows more and more substantial every day. Percentator Republicans who now believe the election was stolen seems to be growing. Only twenty four percent of GOP respondents MPR, PBS News Hour Maris Pole express confidence in last month's selection results. Seventy two percent say they do not trust the election results. Count me among them. Overall, sixty five percent of those survey think the president should formerly concede to Biden. That was the opposite of what we had the poll yesterday. But among Republicans, sixty two percent said they do not think the president should concede, and sixty seven percent of Republicans say they want to see President Trump run again. Only thirty two percent said compared to thirty two percent who said they do. But sixty seven percent of Republicans say they do want to see Trump run again. Eight percent of Democrats, twenty six percent of independence say they want to see another Trump campaign. That's interesting. We're getting some, apparently Biden if he becomes president on January twentieth, after tens of millions of Americans have been inoculated with President Trump's ninety five percent effective COVID vaccine. But anyway, apparently he's too frail, apparently to subject himself to the risks of a real presidential inauguration ceremony. So he's gonna almost entirely do the thing virtually, which will be the model for the rest of his presidency. Rumor going around that there will only be one inaugural ball, which would take place in the Biden basement in the Tela where mansion. Only ten people have been invited. They'll be ordered to stay parked in the Biden driveway and haunt their horns. Is that how we're gonna do it? What Joe and Joe Biden will dance alone on closed circuit eve unbelievable by the way. I mean now they I mean, it's a big freaking deal. What is going on here with this um, with with this whole uh COVID vaccine. Now we're we're gonna have six of them by the time this is all said, nuts, we're gonna have six of them anyway, Um, so we'll watch and monitor all of this. But I was why I can't stop reading about it. They actually had a picture in The New York Post today about the world's first coronavirus vaccine recipient, a ninety year old woman by the name of Margaret keenan University of Hospital of Coventry in England, and Trump signed in an order that says, yeah, we're gonna be the priority. We talked a lot about that yesterday. I'm not sure what's going on in Cornell University. Apparently they had a mandated flu shot this year, but um not if you're not white. I mean, why are we dividing a campus along racial lines like that? What's the point students rush to a medical school in coronavirus era because doctor shortages now are being predicted UK issues and allergy warning about the fives of vaccine after one patient fell ill. You know, there are going to be things that we're going to read. But the one thing that we did find a ninety five percent efficacy rate efficiency rate. It were effective and then of course with limited side effects and nobody's dying and antibodies are formed, which is what you want. That's that's everything you're looking for. And now we have a military operation, logistics operation to get this out. So we're watching all of this very very closely. And I think it's really important for the country in the world that we've been able to once again step up and do this. So we're gonna we're gonna watch. So just to update you on where we are with these voter fraud challenges. Now, yesterday the US Supreme Court rejected the emergency appeal by Pennsylvania Republicans that sought to avoid the election. This was a strong legal challenge. Personally, I'm disappointed in what they're going to continue to pursue a quick action on this. But this dealt with the Pennsylvania legislature and what is known as Acts seventy seven, which massively expanded mail in voting. Remember, the rejection rate was twenty seven percent less than it was in twenty sixteen. That alone auto raised eyebrows for everybody and anyway. But the Constitution of Pennsylvania is very clear, and that is they while the legislature and Democrats in the state and the Democratic governor in the state signed Acts seventy seven, they did it in what was a direct violation of Pennsylvania's constitution. The Constitution of Pennsylvania features extremely pacific and carefully documented restrictions surrounding all mail in voting and that can only be changed through a constitutional amendment. So, in other words, the division and acrimony everybody had predicted, from the Baker and Carter commissions to the New York Times everybody in between, this was one thing again everybody agreed on. They all agreed that they didn't trust dominion voting machines, and they all agreed that large amounts of mail in ballots lend itself towards corruption, fraud, ballot harvesting, and everything else that we now have been following more closely than any of us wished to ever have had to carry. And it's very very you know, it's beyond frustrating and angering to everybody. You got nearly two dozen House Republicans are urging the President's Attorney General, Bill Bardo, appoint a special counsel to investigate election integrity. Well, we don't get it fixed, we're never gonna have a free, fair election that we get a faith and confidence and ever again in the country. I think the Texas case, I'm not going to overinterpret what the court decided yesterday. They could have just done exactly what they did with the Pennsylvania case and just outright reject the emergency appeal. They did not. They're asking these four states. Perhaps it's related to whether or not they viewed Pennsylvania alone's outcome determinative. I'm not sure, but that would be my best guests. I still disagree with it strongly. But in the case of Texas suing as a result of Georgia and Michigan and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, well, that would be outcome determinative. And these other states now are required to respond to all of this. I'm not going to go over all of the things that we explained in great detail yesterday. One is the jurisdiction issue in original jurisdiction, and that would mean the issue of standing, which I would argue they absolutely have, because if those states were forced to follow the constitutional process, which Texas very articulately lays out the Attorney General Paxson in his case, then in fact that would be outcome determinative, but it would also result in the disenfranchisement of every Texas voter. And frankly, now we have other states, Alabama, others now have all joined in. I think we have six more states now that are filing amicus briefs on behalf of the Texas ag and then we get into the issue of the first violation. That'd be the clause article too Constitution, the electors clause and how each state shall appoint presidential election electors in the matter of the legislature therefore made direct Well, then that goes to the heart of the Georgia case and the consent agreement with the Secretary of State after the lawsuit by the Democratic Party from earlier this year. Then it gets to the heart of the case and a lot of other states as well, or or the Pennsylvania Supreme Court extending by three days the deadline. That would be again a decision that only state legislators can make, not a Supreme court decision in the state. And then we have again straightforward language in the state of Wisconsin, where for example, they don't allow early voting, but yet the ballots were handed out anyway. That would have been a decision that would have had to have been made by the state legislature, which didn't happen. So we'll watch all of this and there's a lot of developments. Was still apparently there's more people that are out there telling as whistleblowers. There's stories about the things that they have said just like all the other people that we've had on this program. For example. You know, it's one thing that Kelly mcinaney had pointed out an analysis, and I've often pointed out, Okay, if you look statistically, do you really believe Joe Biden got fifteen million more votes than Hillary Clinton or fifteen million more than Barack Obama? Even I find that hard to believe. If you believe that he underperformed with minorities in pretty much every liberal city in the country except for the states we're talking about, and that would be Fulton County, Georgia, Wayne County, Detroit, Michigan, Pennsylvania of the Philly area, and then other places like Milwaukee and Nevada. Oh wow, that's a little bit. That's that's a little bit too convenient from my analysis. Expert analysis using commonly accepted statistical tests further raised other issues about it, meaning the probability of the former vice president winning the popular vote in the four defendant states in the ag case of Texas, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin independently, if you look at three am November fourth, while the vote county is going on, you know, it would be less than one in a quadrillion that Joe Biden can come back win all four of those states collectively with that big of a deficit at that point in time in the county. I mean, basically, what they're saying then is seven million you know, votes cast melon ballots cast mostly for Biden, mostly in the states that we're all talking about. Statistically, that then becomes very difficult to buy. At least I from my perspective, it becomes difficult to buy. Maybe some of you don't have a problem with it. The state Alabama, Louisiana attorney generals back the Supreme Court challenged by Texas. Missouri joined the fight along Texas to challenge the results. The Nevada Supreme Court did reject the Trump campaign appeal, affirming and Biden win. That didn't surprise us out there. But statistically there's more anomalies out in Nevada than any of the state that I've seen. You've got Republican attorneys general setting their sights on checking Joe and Kamala if in fact they get into office. Democrats now promising vote we bringing back the lowest learner as the irs had because they're now pushing to expand the IRS's enforcement activities and already looking to add five point two billion dollars. Here we go, they're coming for your money. And Republicans scoff at the Biden plan to create a conservative outreach post. There's no outreach with Democrats. They don't want to. They don't want to outreach. Now, I'm not going to even get into the whole issue of whether or not what the result of this is going to be. What I am going to tell you is that if we don't fix it, and we don't get it right, then the country is going to be in big trouble, and that means long term. You've got, for example, the latest lawsuit in Georgia, they actually documented tens of thousands of illegal votes. This is similar to what they did out in Nevada and instead of properly updating voter registration roles. Now we're going to go forward as a country. The medium mob's never going to tell you these things. We're gonna go forward and get elections right. We better understand the Federalists did a good job on this today. Remember he won Georgia supposedly, if you believe that Biden won by twelve thousand votes, Okay, The lawsuit points out that they have identified, instead of updating their voter registration lists, sixty six thousand, two hundred and forty seven underage registrants, forty thousand, two hundred and seventy nine people had moved counties without reregistering, ten thousand, three hundred and fifteen people who were deceased on election day, eight thousand and seven hundred, eighteen of whom had been registered as dead before their votes were accepted. Two thousand, four hundred twenty three were not on the state voter rolls. Four thousand, nine hundred twenty six voters who had registered in another state after they registered in Georgia that would make them ineligible. Fifteen thousand, seven hundred voters who had filed day National Change of Address form without reregistering. And I mean it goes on from there. Well, Governor, do you care I'm talking about the governor or Georgia? Apparently not. By the way, details of Senate candidate Warnox obstruction in a child abuse pro it was a little scary. And by the way, have you heard the details of Congressman Swalwell. We're gonna get into that. Eight hundred nine four one sewn is on number. If you want to be a part of the program. All right, as we roll along, eight hundred and nine four one sean you want to be a part of the program. This is getting very, very very interesting to me, this whole Eric Swalwell story. Now, the backdrop of this is a foxnews dot com article out today about Pompeio Secretary of State, warning of a Chinese threat to US colleges, saying many are basically bought by Beijing. There was one family I can think of that's more bought and paid for by China than any other. That would be the Bidens. Anyway, It's like, what's happening with Swalwell and what apparently has gone on here is pretty unbelievable. And Kevin McCarthy, by the way, demanding Pelosi boots Swalwall from the House Intelligence Committee. And what you have is, I mean, this is the guy that Russia, Russia, Russia or Russia along with Nataler and you know, the shift show himself. Anyway, you have accused Chinese government spy woman by the name of Fang Fang, a Christine Fang, entering the US through California as a college student in twenty eleven spends the next four years wooing everyone local politicos and Swalwall according to Axios and citing current former US intelligence officials, anyway, even like slept with two small town mayors, and you can't write this in a novel anyway, got close to Eric Swalwell, who's on the House Intel Committee. Quote, she was on a mission a US counterintelligence official, set of fang, including plenty of seduction before the Feds got wind of her antics and she vanished and Fang raised funds for Swalwell back in the day and interacted with the Congressman at a number of events for several years. Why the hell is he on this House Intel Committee? All right? So now we have more states joining in the joining the Texas Attorney General. West Virginia's attorney general has joined the Texas brief as it relates to the case that they're bringing there. Now, the state of Missouri has filed dynamicus brief on behalf of itself and sixteen other states and support of Texas's application in terms of the lawsuit that was filed yesterday. You know, this is it. This is the one that now we're gonna watch very very closely, especially in light of what the court did yesterday with the Pennsylvania case. Now we're gonna get into more detail with that. That's the case that's brought by Congressman Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania's sixteenth district. So well, you know, obviously, well more details coming up with our panel of legal experts in a little bit here. But I'm back to the swallwall thing. So you know, when you look at I call it the the Joe Biden candidate Protection Program, and when you really think about it, this is the media today. And I don't want to be a broken record about this, but it's it bears repeating, is that the media is not objective. They're not fair, they're not balanced, they have an agenda, they're abusively biased, they're corrupt. They fed this country nothing but lies about Trump and Russia for three long years. You know, they've advanced and pushed every democratic, radical socialist talking point as it related to their phony impeachment hoax, all while ignoring quid pro quo Joe and zero experienced hunter. They ignored vetting Obama, they ignored what was real Russian interference. Hillary's bought and paid for dirty dossier, the dirty dossier not only unverifiable now debunked, used for four fives applications, without which they wouldn't have gotten the application. You know we have comy and even what Sally Yates, Rod Rosensteino, knowing what we know now, No, I would never have signed it, little late guys, and where's Durham by the way side note, all of that happened, but the media pushed it all. The media had an agenda. You know, we Peter Schweitzer in Secret Empires. This book was blockbuster. We did the first interview on radio, the first interview on TV, and that's when we first heard about Barisma. You know. Then we got you know, culminating in the dumbest interview of a forty nine year old and GMA's history and he experienced oil gas energy now Ukraine Nope, and he experienced at all Nope. Why do you think you got paid millions it or new Maybe because your dad is the vice president in charge of your creating policy. Probably And it's like an admission, you're not you got six hours, you're not getting a billion US tax dollars. Unbelievable And they went with one hearsay anonymous non whistleblower. As the pretense of it all, we only had one fact witness in that whole sham impeachment, and they dragged the country through hell, and then they dragged the country three years of Russian hell. They were all wrong. I mean, that's how corrupt the media is. Then the media is so corrupt. They left Biden hide in the basement the entire time, Joe Biden and his basement bunker, and they did Biden's job for him. He didn't need to do anything because they were out there pounding Trump every day and beating him up every day. You know, they like giddy. We finally got Trump to answer a question for the first time in three weeks, and I'm like, you let this guy go the entire campaign. By the way, he's botching up his cabinet officials names and even what they're going to be secretaries of Yesterday, I'm grateful to the members of my COVID team, but I'd like to introduce to you now who will lead the way. I'm really proud of this group. For Secretary of Health and Educations, I nominated Javier Baccharia, you know, Javier Bascher Excuse me, Yeah, we'll get it right eventually. This just then two Tennessee's Attorney generalos signonomicus brief. That's big news. Supporting the Texas Texas election results. That's another big one. Um uh oh, hang on important. I'm writing somebody here anyway. So now I'm looking at, you know, all these people that are involved in this corruption. They don't do their job, They're not gonna they're going to allow this guy to be you know, Hyde and Biden the whole time. Then you look at all these phony hypocrites, you know that was so upset about foreign election interference. How do you ignore the Russian first lady in Moscow and the wire transfers with the hunter and his company. How do you ignore a Kazakh oligarch and wire transfers there. How do you ignore no experience that anybody can find in private equity and the one billion dollars later one point five billion dollars Bank of China deal. How do you not you know, look at any of this and say, well, why would the mob protect it? Well, the same thing is happening. I guess you got this honey trap set by Chinese, by the Chinese government against us. And then I'm reading this story and what Pompeio was warning that Chinese is threatening US colleges and saying these colleges are being basically bought off by Beijing. Now, okay, that's censored themselves to avoid upsetting the communist regime. And he said, it's poisoning the well of our higher education institutions. If we don't educate ourselves, if we're not honest about it, we're getting schooled by Beijing. He's probably right. Makes you wonder about this virus. How come nobody wants ever talks about, well, what price is China gonna pay for all the murder and mayhem caused by them? And they're handling of this virus they knew it was bad. How do we know they wouldn't allow travel out of Wuhan Private province into any other part of China. You couldn't travel from any part of China into Wuhan, but they left wide open their international travel. In other words, you could leave Wuhan Province and go to Italy or any other any other part of the world. Look at what it's look at what the result has been. And I know we've got the vaccine, but still anyway, Upo goes on to say scholars or lord into their recruitment programs paid to do research in or for China, while other easy targets for their anti American messaging do their own anti American bias. We see it too seldom. He goes on to say, he said administrators would be up at arms. You would expect that, but they're not, and they often do it out of fear of offending China. Now let me tell you something, Yeah, Putin is a hostile actor. Russia is a hostile regime, no question. I think a bigger threat as China. Now we got, you know, a guy, Joe Biden, that is completely compromised by this country with his son, God only knows what they probably have on tape somewhere. And we find out that this guy on the you know, we're supposed to care about foreign interference in the United States, and you got Eric Swalwell was on the House Intelligence commit Kevin McCarthy took aim at him earlier today, arguing he should no longer serve on the House Intelligence Committee. This is the guy that took the leading role for the democrats impeachment efforts and the Russia hoax lies. He's long been disqualified from serving on the Intel community, peddling Russian disinformation, and you know it's all an effort by a reported spy he's a part of to gather information for China. Swalwall being a national security liability, well so is Joe Biden. I mean, let me tell you something. These countries play for keeps. You know. I've talked to some friends of mine that have done businesses business abroad with some of the countries that we discuss here, and what they tell you is just chilling in terms of the amount of spying that goes on if you visit these countries, the amount of corruption that exists within these countries, that the level of sophistication in terms of their efforts to undermine the United States. So now you've got a congressman along with mayors. Apparently a couple of mayors were sleeping with this accused Chinese government spy. Swalwall has taken money from that was raised by this accused Chinese government spy. And then by the way, they treat democrats so differently than they do, say Donald Trump, they actually went to Swalwall and said, yeah, you might you might not want to associate with this person. Why didn't they do that with anybody in the Trump campaign? Would they assume that he wouldn't want to be patriotic, because apparently documents exist. I've been told by my sources that said they did exactly that with Hillary Clinton's campaign to protect information that might be classified. Is there any possible compromising material was on Swallowell? What is the nature of the compromise? This is Adam Schiff, But they're compromising materials and I'm compromising. Really, what's the nature of the compromise? Uh? The talkers ordinating in the bed in the bed did go peeps in the bed that actually was in the stupid Hillary Clinton dossiated through the country into this turmoil for three years and they got away with it. Does Vladimir know? But of course met with trumpus in in New York at some point after the twenty thirteen Miss Universe, Yes, agin absolutely, and she got compromising materials on trout after their short relations. Okay, And what's the nature of the compromise? Well, there were and so Putin was made aware of the availability of the compromising material. Yes, of course, Buzava shared those materials with Soap Checking subject shares those materials with Putin because she's a god daughter of Putin, and Puttin decided to press on Trump and and the materials that you can provide to the committee or to the FBI. Would they corroborate this allegation? Sure, of course. When they were in Ukraine, we got their conversation by the phone where they're discussed those compromising materials. We are ready to provide it to FBI. So you have recordings of both soap Check and Buseva where they're discussing the compromising material on mister Trump. Absolutely, he's coordinating with her with somebody that he thinks as a Russian What for to get compromising matterdeals on up naked Trump? Gosh, what a dope. Now Swalwell is suggesting Trump is behind the access report. These people are freaking to range man. Oh gosh. Anyway, Swalwell warned of influx of Russians and US politics under Trump. What about his compromising my titials? When are there's any compromising my titials on Trump? And you know this this honeypot apparently scandal that went on. These mayors apparently slept with this person. Unbelievable, but that's the nature of your Democratic Party. You know, there was an interesting story. It looks like China's already. You know, they want to try and pick up where they left off with the Biden corruption family. And remember all the money they paid to Hunter, the email outlining how it's going to be distributed twenty million, one hundred ten million for the big guy. Remember that holding it, Tune will hold it for the big guy. It's like the time the Biden. You know, I'm going to return the favor. There is a daily wire piece out. A top US official told the think tank last week that US intelligence has seen a sharp uptick in the Chinese Communist Party to influence Joe Joe Biden's team and those around them. A National Counterintelligence Security Center director William Nina told the Aspen Institute that the think tank that China has launched an influenced campaign on steroids targeting Biden. What we predicted China would now literally reemphasize their influence in the campaigns to the new administration. We're starting to see that now play across the country to not only the folks that are in the administration, those around the folks of the administration. So that's one area we're going to be very keen on making sure the new administration understands that influence. What it looks like, what a taste like, what it feels like. Robert Brian, the National Security Adviser, had warned back in August that China was trying to elect Biden and that China had the most sophisticated global influenced programs and strategies and abilities and capabilities in the world. Wow. By the way, China apparently is amassing large quantities of private American healthcare data, including sensitive genetic information. As the coronavirus pandemic you know, is now put more people in the medical system, They've made collecting health related data a national priority, according to a new report submitted to Congress by the US China Economic Security Review Commission. Great, that's good news. And by the way, it looks like Mayor Pete may get a China post. Well got her thirty eight year old former mayor a South Bend, apparently letting him deep in his foreign policy chops Buddha Judge's future anyway, they believe that, you know, giving him that prestigious position. I don't trust any of these people. Everybody's so corrupt. You know my faith, my confidence in government is at the lowest point it's ever been. I never really had faith in it anyway. I think most intelligent Americans have a healthy distrust of all things government. All right, Leonard Skinner's simple man can mean only one thing, and that is all things. He's really not simple, the fact that it's a great irony. He considers himself a simple man, but it means all things. Bill O'Reilly, of course at bill O'Reilly dot COM's book continues to do well on every bestseller list. Killing a Crazy Horse fifteen in a series of killing books, I might count Killing Hannity. You'll be a version nineteen or twenty. Hopefully it'll be very late in life when we get When he finally gets around to him, mister O'Reilly, sir, how are you You know? They always big? They always big. Every week you run that and people, no, that's your interest. Imagine this. So you're gonna do a bill O'Reilly tour. I mean, you go on tour still fairly regularly, and the house is gonna go dark, and all of a sudden upcomes Leonard skinnerd simple Man, and the music gets louder, and he gets louder and louder and louder than a spotlight comes on and out walks the giant and that's you six foot? What are you four? Or five? Bill O'Reilly? Yeah? And you know you should be a producer of these shows. But I would have to play to talk, no record. We'll just have the guys over here, a good guys. Let me let me but before you come on with your agenda, all right, he said, I didn't even ask billow question, and he was about to launch into what he wants to talk about and and but I want to ask you a question. I'm a little curious about when it comes your time, we don't want to go ahead of any list, you know, health professionals and those with pre existing conditions and compromised immune systems and whoever deserves it before us, they get it first, right, okay, But when it comes your turn and you have a chance, would you take it? Yes, I'm going to take it. I'm an old guy, so as you get it pretty soon, that's probably true. You're ahead of me on that list. Just for the record, you know they're they're going I understand by age and intelligence, so I'm way up there, Okay, Okay on the age part. You're totally qualified. On the intelligence part, that's up for debate. Go ahead, Oh come on, now, you The reason I'm going to get it is because I don't care whether I turn into a werewolf or not. Are you you're not an anti vaxer guy? All I mean, because Linda's kind of I mean, any side effect, it'll be fine because I won't have to pay my taxes. So if I'm a vampire, I mean, I'm not gonna file. It's hey, Bill, I hate to tell you, when you die, you're going to be paying more in taxes, not if I move to Bolivia. By the way, you see, Joe Biden's people are saying, yeah, we want to add another five billion dollars to IRS enforcement. I like, with my account, We're good, right, I tell you pay everything, overpay, and he goes, yeah, we overpay. Still, yes, yeah, And the five billion is just to protect the IRS from the popular uprising that's going to gappen if they continue down this road, because now it's seizure a private property, which is what the progressive left wants, desperately wants. They want to be able to pass wealth taxes all over the place and basically come in, assess whatever you have, and then take a piece of it, even though what do you have has been bought by post tax dollars, so it's unconstitutional. But that's what they want to do, and that's why this election was so important. But people who don't have much, they don't care about that issue. They want more given to them by the federal government. And that's the struggle in America between the halves and the have nots. And you saw it play out in this election. What was your take? And then I want to get to Georgia, But what was your take? I read this suit by the Attorney General of Texas. I had him on TV last night. I asked him a lot of questions. It was well written, it was well thought out, it was well argued. It has real legitimacy. If the law and the Constitution are truly followed, they win bill. Yes, but it won't be because the Supreme Court is going to rule that the state of Texas has no standing. That's what the ruling will be. But the bill, but if I may very very gently, but the problem the reason this is one of those cases there's a very small number of categories as you know, I'm not telling you anything you don't know in which the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction. One of them is controversies between two and more states. That's why that's right, and they could do something about it. But the State of Texas is basically saying, when you cut through all illegalisms, our citizens in Texas were disenfranchised in the presidential election because it was cheating in four at least four states, and you, the Supreme Court, have to remedy. That keyword remedy. That's the lawsuit, and it's it's a good lawsuit. It's smart, it is smart, but it's well done. It's not going to be successful. Look, the odds are with you. And I'm not the pollyannish person, Bill, I think you know, I'm pretty rooted in reality. But if the law and the Constitution were truly followed in its straightforward language and the way this was argued and laid out and all ninety whatever pages of this thing yesterday, if that mattered, you see, because I think the courts tainted by politics like everything else. I mean John Roberts, you know, every report was that he was going to rule against Obamacare, but then decided it was too political for the Court to be involved in it and changed his view. Yeah, and I think he's a liberal man anyway. But getting back to the election, the Pennsylvania situation was clearly a violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Ye, all right, there's no legitimate argument that it was not. But the courts, both state and federal today, Alito and the Supreme Court said you had a year to do this, You had a year to challenge this mail in thing, and he didn't do it. Therefore we're not going to hear it. They didn't say it was wrong, they said we're not going to hear it because it's filed too late. These are the little rationalizations that creep into the Supreme Court all the time. People should know listening to us right now, Hannity, the most powerful entity in this country is the Supreme Court, far more powerful than the Congress or the President, because they're the last word. It may not be fair, it may not be right, it might not be based on the Constitution. But what those nine people say is what's going to happen. And so people should understand that none of the nine justices want to overturn this election psychologically and emotionally, they don't want to do it, so they're going to find a reason not to do it. And that's where we are. I wish I could dispute what I think would ultimately be the outcome. Now. I do think there will be some brave Supreme Court justices. If I were to anticipate it would be Alito, it would be Clarence Thomas, it will be Amy Coney, Barrett. But it won't be John Roberts. I can tell you that. And to be honest, I think course sits in Kavanaugh are still question marks, and I really don't have the I don't believe they'll go there. That's my guests not going to get there. They're not going to hear it. Okay, it'll be interesting. Now. They could have killed it off yesterday, Bill, and they didn't. And they're asking these states to respond, so they're going to take a look at it. And we don't have any indication of it. And I mean, if there was a betting thing, I would put a lot of money on this. They're not going to hear it, just as they didn't hear the Pennsylvan Pennsylvania, And you're right, the Pennsylvania case legislators in that state went against the direct wording of their own state constitution. That's a slam dunk legal issue that wasn't even in dispute, correct, But not to hear it, and they'll find a way not to hear the Texas challenge. Well, that is why you're right. That's like Levine years ago wrote the book Man in Black. Was it laid all of this out. Let me go to the state of Georgia. Um, you got the runoff races there, Loffler and Purdue against Assa and Warnock too, really radical hardcore leftists. But then you've got this intramural battle going on between the dope governor the dopey secretary of State. Can you imagine the secretary of state? And again this goes to the heart of the constitutional issue. In terms of election law is constitutionally only in the hands of the state legislature, but independent of the state legislature. The Secretary of State went into a consent agreement with Democrats that sued earlier this year the Georgia Democratic Party, the Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the congressional committees and allowed this too system of signature verification that would be the sole role of the legislature. With that said, they don't want to admit they've made a mistake, so they kind of have aligned and they won't come back in a session and fix the problems that are quite obvious and transparent after November third, which would be necessary to have free, fair elections in Georgia, which is a big mistake of my view. Well, they're not going to admit a mistake now all. They're just not going to do it. I think that the two senators on the Republican side will win. You do, I'm not sure. I'm not so sure I agree with you. Well, Kennedy, you know you're disagreeing with a guy who I just stop. Stop you. You've actually come a long way this year. This is the first time you ever said I could never even think about running for a Democrat. We were getting to hanitize you. Your appearances on the show have helped you. Listen. I want people to understand that Georgia is not some crazy state. It's essentially a conservative, traditional state. And here's the backup. There was one man who ran for the state Senate. That's a statewide race in Georgia, a Republican. He won by fifty four percent of the vote that couldn't have happened in a liberal state. So I think that Georgians are gonna They know the Democratic candidates are far left. We're not talking about moderate people, as you just pointed out, and I think they're going to go in and it'll be It's not going to be a landslide, but I think both Senate GOP candidates will win. But before you have to take a break and sell the humongous stuff that you sell, I have a provocative thing that I'm going to say to my audience on Bill O'Reilly dot COM's and I want to know if you agree with this. You ready, I want Attorney General bar to call for a special prosecutor to investigate the election. I do too. I agree with you, Okay. I don't even think it's controversial at all. This becomes vital, okay, because Trump can't do it. Bar's got to do it, because nobody's going to investigate this once the inauguration takes place. The States aren't going to investigate their own screw ups. The press wound investigate, and certainly the Justice Department under Biden's not going to investigated. For this country to function, we gotta get to the bottom of this fraud stuff, and a special prosecutors should be a point. I've got to I've got to take that break. But I'll say this too. If you look at what they did to this country in the last four years, Russia Russia, Trump Russia, collusion that never happened, premeditated fraud, Faiza court abuse, using Killery's dirty dossier, the whole ignore quid pro quote Joe zero experience hunter, but will impeach the president based on an anonymous heresay whistleblower. I mean, the damage that has been done in the last four years by the left is incalculable. Bill, We'll come back more with Bill O'Reilly All Things o'reiley, Bill O'Reilly dot com eight hundred and nine four one sewn. You want to be a part of this extravaganza. We're gonna go to the heart of that Pennsylvania case with Congressman Mike Kelly, He's the one that brought it. In the next half hour and as we continue, Phill O'Reilly all things O'Reilly at Bill O'Reilly dot com. So I agree with you on bar, but I want to look at the big picture. Bill. You know, I spent three years, and I mean, I think you actually gave me a compliment in the coverage being proven right on Trump and Russia and collusion and five's abuse and the dirty Dusty and nobody else in the media really went and dug that deep. And I appreciated your nice comments about that. And it happened, just like they ignored Joe and Hunter and China and Russia and Kazakhstan and Ukraine. And it happened. Bill. And then you add election fraud and all the mess we've witnessed. I'm worried about the country, so am I. And that's why we need a real tough special prosecutor to look into this election. And I'll give you one solid thing that has to be done. You gotta do forensics on the dominion voting machines. And that means those machines are to be brought in, have to be examined by the federal government to see if there was any fraud, if they were calibrated in a way that wasn't fair. The only people who can do that work for the federal government. You need a subpoena, you got to bring it in. You need the best electronic experts in the world. That is the key to this. I have called for the same thing, Bill, But you know, and I know they're already shredding the hard drives of these machines in Georgia. Belle, Well, then let's see that. Well they are. We already know that did it? You know people who've got to go to jail, Hannity people. Okay, well you know, listen, I support your call for a special prosecutor. What a Durham do? There was so much. All he needed was the Horowitz Report, and he had enough indictments to make I understand. But you if you have two reasons, you have two choices. You can stay in America and be a loyal, patriotic citizen, or you can move to another country. But I'm going to Screa is loud as I can scream for justice. I want to know what happen, and then I'll tell you what O'Riley. I'll partner with it. And I think every American patriot that believes in free, fair, honest elections with integrity, that will have confidence and we'll join with us. You and I will partner on this. Do it on your TV shoot tonight if you can, and then I'll steer everybody in there, and then we'll pick out certain politicians that will call the Attorney General and ask for that I guess, you know, for those friends of mine that are just so disappointed, and they are and for all the right reasons, and I am too, so just like it's not in me, Bill to quit. It's not okay, it's we're going to accept this corruption. No, the fight for too many people have paid such a larger price than will ever pay. But all right, all things O'Riley, Bill O'Reilly dot com, simple man, and mister O'Reilly, it's always a pleasure, honor to have you on the program twenty five till the top of the hour, eight hundred and ninety four one sewn. You want to be a part of the program. And the President's not backing now, not giving up the battle. Even though the Supreme Court yesterday not on the Texas case the opposite results happening there. But in the case Tuesday yesterday rejected what I thought was constitutionally probably the strongest case in the country as it relates to the state of Pennsylvania, where Republicans had a strong, powerful legal argument constitutional argument as it relates to the state constitution and what was known as Pennsylvania Acts seventy seven. But in spite of the facts of the case, the Supreme Court rejected an emergency appeal without comment by Pennsylvania Republicans that sought to avoid the results of the election in that big battleground state. Not a good decision in my view. Here's what the president is asking lawmakers in the Supreme Court to do. Hopefully the next administration would be the Trump administration, because you can't steal hundreds of thousands of votes, you can't have fraud and deception and all of the things that they did and then slightly win a swing state. And you just have to look at the numbers, look at what's been on tape, look at all the corruption, and we'll see you can't win an election like that. Now, let's see whether or not somebody has the courage, whether it's a legislator or legislatures, or whether it's a justice of the Supreme Court or a number of justices of the Supreme Court. Let's see if they have the courage to do what everybody in this country knows is right. Anyway. So, by the way, this is the case that Ted Cruz. The one they rejected, not the Texas case, which they are now seeking input from the four states that Texas has mentioned. But this is the one Ted Cruz was willing to argue before the US Supreme Court. This is the Congressman Mike Kelly suit. And this was the suit that went after Pennsylvania Acts seventy seven. Now that act passed by the democratic state legislatures or Democratic legislators, signed by the democratic governor, and the problem is it was in direct violation of Pennsylvania's own constitution. Their state constitution features carefully documented restrictions surrounding mail in mooting, and that can only be changed through a constitutional amendment, a far more difficult process that which we have described in detail. And by the way, for all the good reasons that the New York Times pointed out, the Carter Baker Commission pointed out, and so many others had pointed out prior to this election, that massive use of mail in balloting lends itself towards all this fraud. You take away mail in balloting, we're not in this mess that we have today, where such high percentages of the American people and some polls in the eighty percent range, rejecting the honesty and integrity and have no confidence in the real outcome of this election. Anyway. Greg two follows with us. He is the lawyer based in Pittsburgh. Congressman Mike Kelly Pennsylvania's sixteenth district. He's the one that brought this case. I was a pretty disappointing decision, Congressman yesterday. Yeah, but you know, we were very disappointed. Thank you for having me on the show. We're disappointed that the court was unwilling to grant interim injunctive relief pending our petition for Sir Ferrari. However, all they denied was entering injunctive relief preserving the status quo while they consider our petition for Sir Ferrari. We are still proceeding with this week filing our petition for Sir Ferrari. We do still hope that the Supreme Court will see fit to grant relief with respect to the Unconstitutional Act seventy seven. And by the way, Mike Kelly, I mean, it was pretty much a simple slam dunk cases, not a complicated legal or complicated constitutional question here. It's pretty straightforward. Yeah, we sure thought it was, and Greg has done great work on this. But when it comes down to this is the this is either it's either constitutional or unconstitutional. Acts seventy seven, which was passed in October of twenty nineteen, and so you got to look at what happened and say, listen, forget about anybody, any allegations of fraud, forget about all that. Let's just concentrate on what Pennsylvania did in October of twenty nineteen by changing our voter or laws, but not doing it the proper way, and that is by an amendment, which is an onerous effort. You have to do it the right way, but in great confilcon's Honestly, it really comes down to this was an unconstitutional movement or event that took place in Pennsylvania's legislature, and we really didn't have standing on it until after we were harmed. So when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which is a five two d court by the way, said oh no, no, no, no, you guys came too late. And by the way, you're not allowed to bring this up ever again. But you should have contacted us beforehand. And so how would you follow a lawsuit before you were harmed? That would even be People would say, no, you can't. You can't see somebody for something that hasn't happened. I think I think that was the nasal when watching some of the analysis of you know, these armchair lawyers on TV and some commentators, and that was their suggestion, Well, you should have brought this issue up about Acts seventy seven into twenty nineteen when when it first happened. The problem from my perspective, with that argument is there. I mean, maybe you could have done it, but and pointed out the unconstitutionality of it at the point, I don't know. Well, but we didn't have standing back Sean, we didn't have any standing because we hadn't been harmed. So you really can't follow a lawsuit against something you think may happen procedurally. I'm still scratching my head to find out or to try to figure out what the world Pennsylvania's legislature was thinking of. But then to compound all that, even after this takes place, you had the governor been changing. No. Remember the third at eight o'clock was supposed to be the drop deadtime. No, we're going to let it go to November fourth, November fifth, then we're going to finish up on Friday, November sixth, at five o'clock. And by the way that they're don't have to be the signatures don't have to match, the postmarks don't have to be on there. Nobody's allowed to you. Also, we didn't have people were able to watch the polls of what they did, and you saw that in Philadelphia. So I think when Greg talked about this early, honest, this is as plain as the nose on your face when it comes to this being unconstitutional. And that's what we're challenging right now. And while we didn't get Listen, we didn't get our temper injunctor relief, but we should be able to have the case ard on the basic merits of the case. When would we'd likely hear about that? Greg Toofel, Well, we're going to follow a motion for expedited review. The court could and go along with that and treat it an expedited fashion. If the court is still willing to consider any relief with respect to the twenty twenty election as opposed to only granting relief with respect to future elections, then one would hope that they would handle it on an expedited basis, But that's entirely up to the court there, they're not held any particular schedule. When you got your when they rejected your emergency appeal yesterday, then open the door for the Texas ag case and for the four states that Texas has filed against. Well, how do you interpret those two minor decisions, if you will, So they're not actually related. They're not related, but why one not the other? Well, on the motion to accept the complaint in original jurisdiction, my understanding is all they've done so far is direct the opposing parties to respond. They haven't yet decided whether they're going to take that case yet. Either they directed the opposing party to respond to our application and then ultimately to deny the application. So it's not yet clear whether the Supreme Court is going to be willing to hear that case in its original jurisdiction. It doesn't appear to be obligated to take it. So I hope court does take it. But we are on a very tight calendar right now, so if they were going to take it, we would know fairly quickly. Correct. Oh, I imagine they will on an expedited basis, And I didn't see the schedule, but I'm sure they respond they required a response on an expedited schedule. Okay, So well I guess we're just going to have to wait and see. All right, So what is the next step Mike for you and Greg moving forward? I think we followed the law and do what we think we can do or what we know we can do. But it's you know, Sean, it really does come down to who is it now that we have faith in when it comes to deciding these things. So if it didn't take place in Pennsylvania, it was unconstitutional what they did at seventy seven. There's no question about it. It's unconstitution It violates everyone of the outlines of what you have to do to make an amendment to this. They had to amend it, and they had amended according to what the law says they have to do. So now we look at this and I got to tell you, it's just a regular every I don't have a law degree, but you know what, you look at this and say there's something wrong here when no court will touch it because of what And the answer is, well, you just don't understand how this works. And I said, bingo, I don't you tell me why she wears it, where she wears a blindfold over our eyes and holds a scale that's the even and says I will judge it on the basis of the merits of the case. If we can't rely on this going forward, what in the world can America rely on it? And what does the world think of the greatest nation the world has ever known not be able to figure out how to run its own elections fairly and squarely and counting every legitimate and lawful vote. But then looking at what took place. Listen, John, you and I know this. What happened on November the third wasn't magic, It was math. This was all planned way before that that day. What we're saying now is because of the no excuse mail in ballot that was passed by the Pennsylvania Legislature and signed by the Governor of Pennsylvania, it was unconstitutional and that should throw out that specific part of what it is that was relied upon on November the third and months before that when it came to no excuse mail in ballots that is not part of Pennsylvania's voting procedure. It's unconstitutional and it needs to be revealed as that, and it needs to be it needs to be thrown out that. There's just no way you can look at that and say I'm satisfied with that. There's no way. It has to be taken up by the Supreme Court and they have to rule according to the the constitutional facts. Gregg, what are the next legal steps for hopefully the Supreme Court immediately taking it up, but long term, this is such a clear cut constitutional violation of the Pennsylvania state Constitution. Yeah, when the federal government delegates power to the states to dictate to direct the time, place, and manner of federal elections, it's not a blank check to do it anyway you want. A state legislature is still obligated to follow its own state constitution. And when a state supreme court like Pennsylvania State Supreme Court hunt on ridiculous procedural grounds on latches in this case, and refuses to enforce its own constitution in the administration of the elections of federal elections, that's a federal question that the Supreme Court should care about, should rectify it, shouldn't allow a lawless Pennsylvania legislature to ignore its own constitution and act an unconstitutional law and proceed to implement that law in the twenty twenty election and in all the elections coming up. At the bare minimum should be released granted as the future elections, and one would hope they wouldn't stand by and put a stamp of approval on an election that was conducted illegally and sewn. One of the more ridiculous aspects of this case in Pennsylvania actually started the amendment process in apparent recognition of the fact that amendment was necessary to do this. So if that process continues, all of us Pennsylvanians will get to vote by no excuse mail in ballot on whether we're allowed to vote by no excuse mail in ballot, and if we voted down, if we vote down, the amendment doesn't matter. We will still continue to vote by no excuse mail in ballot, which is just absolutely ridiculous. Well, listen, I wish you a lot of luck, both of you, because this is a critical constitutional issue in Pennsylvania. More importantly, everybody knew, understood completely and fully what would happen, and if you had this widespread mail in ballots is not a surprise, shouldn't be a surprise to anybody. Everybody had predicted it, everybody had warned about it, and it was actually a point of agreement Democrats and Republicans on this one issue, just like dominion machines. Thank you both for being with us. Greg Twofold, thank you. Mike Kelly. Will continue to follow the case closely. We got time for a call here Florida, Chuck standing by Chuck. How are you? I say, as you're a veteran, thank you for serving your country. Welcome to the program. Thank you very much. Not being PC, but I hope you and your family have a merry Christmas and happy New Year's sir. Yeah, you can say Jesus and Christmas and God on this program. It's not bad. I've always known that I am a veteran, and I am most importantly what we refer to as an oathkeeper, and upon entering service, we swear an oath told the Constitution United States, not any particular political party whatsoever, or the government itself, but that piece of paper. And unfortunately, part of the government has found a way to circumvent what holds our country together, and those in charge don't seem to be willing to do anything to offset that, and Unfortunately as getting to be time where oathkeepers and those who truly believe in the way this country started need to come out of the woodwork, because if our elected leaders aren't going to do it. The very first three words of the Constitution say at all we the people, I gotta tell you. And this is where you know, I know, we have elections and people go away and we forget about it, and it's still a problem the next time because we didn't resolve the issues that were discovered. Now, you know, we've learned from a state like Florida that you know, you can have problems and then resolve them. And we had problems in two thousand, we had problems in twenty sixteen, Governor de Santis. Resolve them. Same with Ohio, same with other states. Now that we know where the problems are Georgia, we know we have problems in Nevada, big problems there, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania. Fix it now, and don't you know, say oh how and then we'll scratch our wouldn't conservative it? How could this ever have happened? How could this ever happen again? Because we didn't fix it. And that's why understanding what happened, and getting to the bottom of it is critical. On top of everything else, the injustice of it all, the anger that's associated with it all, it's it's real. Anyway, appreciate the call, Thanks for all you do, Thanks for serving your country. Eight hundred nine four one, Shawn, our number quick break. We'll come back and at the top of the hour will analyze the legal aspect of the ag case in Texas and much more as we continue. All Right, News round up, Information overload hour Sean Hannity Show, eight hundred and nine four one, Seawn. If you want to be a part of the program, all right. So, as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court case was rejected, the US Supreme Court rejecting a look at the Pennsylvania case, which I thought had great constitutional merit. As we were discussing, we are following this new lawsuit. And while yesterday the court had the choice, they could have denied any look at at all of the Attorney General of Texas and his complaint that it was filed. We had the Attorney general law last night, Ken Paxton of Texas, and here is what he said to me. So it's really important point that you're bringing up in a state on state suit. Our only place to go is the US Supreme Court. We can't be heard anywhere else. Other lawsuits started a district court level, and they have a right to be heard at least once, whether they have a good case or a bad case. So our request is we want to be heard. The only place we can go is a US Supreme Court, and so we're pleading with the Uspreme Court, please hear our case, give us a chance at least to argue what we think is right. We want to argue the constitution. It is the responsibility of state legislatures, per the Constitution, to set the rules for election of electors, and in this case, those were overridden. In the four states we're talking about, we're overridden by other officials, whether they were judges or other governmental officials. And that's not the way our constitution works. And that's the challenge we have in front of the court. Can this be overridden by people who are not responsible under the Constitution for doing this. Mister Attorney General, can you explain how the elector's clause in Georgia, Michigan, PA, and Wisconsin were violated? Yeah, So in almost all those cases that we have, states that allowed mail in ballots in cases they were not supposed to. They allowed for non signature of verification, which is really important. So when you request a mail in ballot, you have to sign for that for that application, and then they'll verify when you send your ballot in on a sleeve of the ballot. Usually they'll verify that signature to ensure that those two signatures match. Well, if you just waive those requirements, you have no way to go back and verify that the person that requested the application is the person voting. That's a pretty important thing. When in Pennsylvania go from two hundred and thirty three thousand mail in ballots four years ago to two point five million and the difference in the election was only eighty one thousand, that's a very important issue to ignore. All right. Now, if we get to the heart of the voting here, we have certain things now that we know. We know that for example, if you look at the margin of difference Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia, it's about forty four thousand votes. You have seven million absentee votes cast mostly for Biden. If you look at Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and I mean that's that is a lot and a lot of votes. But remember Wisconsin doesn't even allow early voting like this, yet those ballots were given and the procedures that would secure an absentee ballot were bypassed. Again, another separate suit and the you know presidents, you know rightly trying to point these things out simultaneously. Wells Texas case based on the other merits that we were discussing with the Attorney General of Texas. Anyway, here to weigh in on a Julie Kelly political commentator wrote the book Disloyal Opposition of the Never Trump right tried and failed to take down the President. Greg Jarrett, he's the host of his new podcast, two number one Bestseller's witch Hunt and the Russia Hoax. Welcome both of you. As you look at this from the legal side of things, Greg, Jared, where do you see things at this moment? Well, it's a difficult case to convince the Supreme Court to take. They do have what's called original jurisdiction, so if there's a dispute between two states, they can take the case. But it's discretionary. So's I think, and I was watching your interview last night. I think that's the biggest obstacle that Texas has to overcome. But they have so much evidence here. We have invalid ballots that were backdated, late ballots, illegally counted, blank ballots, assigned random names and filled in ballots didn't matching, didn't match the valid of voters, signatures were missing or didn't match. And some of this place. Some of this was cured illegally, for example, in Wisconsin by election workers. There, I'm allowed to cure ballot like that. So I think that if Texas can present a sufficient amount of evidence, the Supreme Court just might take the case. But frankly, I mean, I've got to be totally honest with you, the chances of the Supreme Court taking this case are not good, all right, So and you're to take Julie, That's what I'm not a lawyer, but I think that what Greg says is pretty accurate in terms of the court taking the case. But look, you can't unsee what they laid out in that lawsuit. A lot of us have been covering that. I've written a few articles about Pennsylvania and Wisconsin myself. To your point, they're what Greg was saying, there's no ballot turing provision in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin. You also had unelected officials, which includes the Secretary State of Pennsylvania who is appointed, not elected like in most states, just rewriting the law arbitrarily on their own and changing the state legislature's legislation the election lot that they set out. So this is a very damning bill of particulars that the Texas to Train General laid out, and it has to be considered when the legislatures plan to vote on December fourteenth for their electors late. All right, So let me go back to greg. Even though the Supreme Court yesterday they turned down the Pennsylvania case, which I thought was a very strong constitutional case which should be something I would believe of great importance that the Supreme Court would prioritize and take up. And that being, of course, the state legislature and basically going against the statutory legal language within the Constitution, which would have taken a constitutional amendment to accomplish if the Constitution were followed. I guess probably their reason, if I had to guess, is that, well, why didn't you do it before the election. But that's my only guess, and I think it's a weak answer. But now you're saying specifically about the Texas a g case, you don't see a good chance that taking it up, even though they ask for arguments from the other four states. Well, just alleging that, you know, there's a violation of the constitution, that's not enough to have standing to sue. Texas really has to establish that it's been injured and their claim here and well, hang on, but it's outcome to these four states would be outcome determinative in the election, and their state has a decided interest in this when the citizens of Texas then would be disenfranchised based on that violation. You're absolutely right, Sean, and Texas is presenting that argument. They are saying that the constitutional rights of our citizens in Texas have been violated by other states that have not followed constitutional rules and laws that they set for the election, so they've been injured. And I, you know, as a lawyer, I think that's a really great argument. However, I know the Supreme Court. I followed the Supreme Court for decades, and I know what they do. They try to avoid getting involved in politically oriented cases, and they are still stinging from the Gore versus Bush two thousand election contest, which I covered down in Florida for thirty seven long days and all the way up to the US Supreme Court, and they will do anything to avoid getting involved in this. And so, you know, as much as I think as a lawyer and legally they should be involved, I'm telling you that historically they're just not going to do it. You're ta, Julie, that's just such a disappointing thing to hear. Greig is probably right. But you know, as we went through these battles Supreme Court justice battles, especially wreck Havanaugh, to have a constitutionalist on the Supreme Court to think that they would punt on what is arguably one of the most important cases that they would ever consider, restoring the integrity of our national election, of rebuking this plan of Democrats by Democrats to steal elections by breaking the laws, violating laws, making up their own laws. That's really going to be a hard till for seventy four million Trump voters to swallow. All right, let's go to what you've been looking at, and that is on some of the more technical side of the voting machines and other investigations involved in the election. Because I don't think I think the polls are right. I think the people this country have accurately identified that these elections are full of fraud and laws being just you know, cast aside, abandoned. No, I mean partisan observers never allowed to observe all sorts of irregularities happen, and people don't have faith in the confidence an integrity of the vote. And I don't we never will. I don't see it ever happening. So where do you stand in your investigation? Well, I will say a couple of things really stood out in that Texas lawsuit. One was in Georgia. The rejection rate for mail in ballots in twenty sixteen was about six point four percent. This year it was point three to seven percent, even though there were something like six times as many mail in ballots used in Pennsylvania. Obviously changed Kathy Books are changing all the rules at the last second, apparently defying another Supreme Court order, Justice Ledo's order to segregate those ballots. I don't even know if that's been decided. In Wisconsin, the idea of Milwaukee County election workers filling in missing addresses on the certification envelope and allowing those ballots to be illegally cured and inspected before the deadline. Those are some of the major issues that of course in Michigan, the Secretary State mailing out seven point seven million mail in valid applications without proper authority. I mean that's a point, I mean seven million without look at for example, and again it's outcome determinative dive in a place like Wisconsin, or the signature verification issue in Georgia, or the constitutional issue that's emerged in Pennsylvania, or the statistical information you know, one in one quad brillionth of an opportunity in terms of the anomalies in ms in the results that ultimately came out, and the unlikelihood that any of this would have happened, which we've gone over in great specificity in detail. Now. The problem is, as you know, as Jonathan Turley was on the line, the President's running out a runway, and I was going to have to land a seven fifty seven on a postage stamp at this point because of real time considerations, Greg, Yeah, the job of investigating is demanding, is time consuming. That clock is ticking. I mean today is actually the day, Shaun, as you well know, of the Safe Harbor deadline, and so electors are being selected by the states, and you know in less than a week. Of course, the Electoral College meets. That would be next Monday. But even Ruth Bader Ginsberg had really said the drop dead data is Congress on January sixth, and then inauguration day schedule for the twentieth. You know, the core question is there was no question that there was rampant fraud. Did it happen in sufficient numbers that change the outcome? So that's the core question. And it's almost impossible. I can tell you this is a lawyer for forty years. You cannot dig up the evidence and present it in court of law to stop this runaway train with outbreaks in the six week period of time that is allotted. It just cannot be done. So what's going to happen is that, you know, lawyers and investigators and historians will end up judging who actually on the twenty twenty presidential election, notwithstanding who's inaugurated on January twentieth. It weren't their varying analysis after two thousand in terms of some saying Gore one, some saying Bush one. Yeah, there were and you know, anybody with a brain could see this coming a mile away. There have been three separate studies and commissions that said this was going to happen. You know, years ago they concluded that universal mail in balloting is a recipe for corruption and electoral disaster. There are too many ways to trifle with mail in ballots. And it certainly happened here and I identified a few minutes ago all the way. Look that you're talking about the Baker Carter Commission, you talk about the New York Times, you're talking about you know, everybody had said the same thing, and then they used COVID as an excuse the one time they didn't, you know, quote the great doctor Fauci that he said it was safe to vote in p you know, with social distancing, etc. Judges in Pennsylvania who were saying, oh, forget the law that we passed for exactly that's their Supreme Court. Greg, all right, thank you both, Julie, Thank you, Greg, Jared, thank you eight hundred and nine for one. Sean, you want to be a part of the program. A twenty five till the top of the hour. We'll get to your calls coming up here. I see that Goya Foods named Congresswoman a Casio Cortez employee of the month after sales spike with her calls to boycott the company's product because the president of the company actually praised the Trump economy. What a what a terrible thing. And when she boycotted us, our sales increased a thousand percent. Did we ever send any Goya products to the local food bank that I'd like to work with? Linda, Linda, I've been here for fifteen years. All right, all right, stop, yes we did, we did, right, we bought Miley did too, right, that's right, and we've and by the way, they're great foods, and I now buy them. I never bought them before. They actually are great, great beans and stuff. And you know, especially if you're like, make awesome chili, their beans make awesome chili. I make the best chili, pathways chili. Yes, I do. I really, you do, not, it says who says me? Because you already know him a good cook? Why are you acting like I'm not. You might be a good cook doesn't mean you make the best chili. I make the best chili. I make the best corn beef, and I make the best breakfast. I make the best everything and I grow the best steaks anymore funny else? No, okay, just checking both. Yeah, but she's busy selling her tax the rich gear. What does she have sweatshirts? Fifty nine bucks tax the rich sweatshirts? Can you imagine? Did you see by the way that the Democrats now they want to give the I R. S another five point two billion dedicated to enforcement activities? What is this lowest learner? Two point zero? Now go after every Conservative? What do I always tell my financial guys, pay it, pay it, pay it ding ding they pay. I think, what's the point. I know so many conservatives they just get, you know, attacked. Unbelievable eight hundred nine for one Shawn, if you want to be a part of the program here, I don't know if you saw the list of crimes out in Los Angeles that they now have a DA's do not prosecute list. Misdemeanor cases will be declined or dismissed prior to arrayment of factors for consideration. The list includes trespassing, disturbing the peace, a minor in possession of alcohol, driving without a license, driving with a suspended license. You're not gonna get in trouble making, criminal threats, drug and paraphernalia possession. I guess a crack pipe and needles are okay. Being under the influence of a controlled substance, public intoxication is okay, Loitering to commit prostitution, and resisting arrest is okay. And they'll not seek the death penalty. And those accused of misdemeanor's low level felonies will be referred to community based programs for juveniles. Those accused of any misdemeanor no longer they have there's no consequences. Our prosecutorial approach should be based towards keeping youth out of the juvenile justice system. All if you just keep letting him go, they'll be out. And with the employing the lightest touch necessary to provide for public safeties. You know, you add this to the massive defunding of the police effort, it's getting to be the wild West out there. It's going to become the wild West twenty twenty. You know, for all the liberals that don't want citizens that don't believe in the Second Amendment to have firearms, well, we've sold more firearms in twenty twenty than any other year on record. And you know, the shooting rate in New York's jumped nearly one hundred and twenty five percent. Does that surprise you. By the way, Black Lives Matters co founder is firing back at Obama for criticizing defund the police. That's where this is all headed. You have an emergency medical team unit robbed in Brooklyn, Lord by a fake phony phone call. I mean, you can't make this up. You look at House and Senate Democrats. They're prioritizing foreign nationals and bills while Americans remain jobless and they're more concerned about bringing in people from other parts of the world. How don't we hire americans first? Unbelievable? This is now what you know, Welcome to This language is now evolved, according to dictionary dot com and a response to the court packing definition change. So, in other words, dictionary dot com change their definition of court packing in response to a Twitter users acknowledgement of the change that language evolves and apparently this new definition responding to a tweet criticizing a Playboy reporter for implying Republicans packed the courts zumably with the vacancy that, by the way, it happened all those other times in the past Ruth Bader Ginsburg and anyway, language evolves, so do we. And a November first archive shows a definition of court packing based on the US history Franklin FDR trying unsuccessfully nineteen thirty seven to add six additional justices which had invalidated a number of his new New Deal laws. But anyway, now they want to just change the name. I mean, it's unbelievable. Cornell University is offering race based exemptions to the flu vaccine mandate, and they said students who identify as a person in color of color can seek an exemption to the school's flu vaccination mandate for on campus residents because of historical injustices and current events. And we required all students attending its campus to receive a flu vaccine according to its COVID nineteen Behavioral Compact, and the school allowed wiggle room for students who identify as quote, black, Indigenous, or as a person of color and may have personal concerns about fulfilling the compact requirements based on historical injustices and current events. That does not exist to all students. That would be called discrimination. I'm not quite sure if I don't even like the policy to begin with to be honest anyway, unbelievable times we're living. It's getting nuttier. And did you see what's going on out in Portland? Portland exploded in violence again, hundreds of protesters attempting to set up another autonomous zone, reclaim a home that was sold by an African American family to pay for legal fees. When the Sun was arrested, so they outrage with a dozen arrests, more violence. Apparently family was removed in September. They're thrown rocks at officers again. Why would they stop? They didn't get in trouble the last time. People out there spread a fire extinguisher at them. Damn much police vehicles. And this happened all in broad daylight. And that genius Mayor Wheeler out there sent out a statement he's authorizing Portland police to use all lawful means to end the occupation and not going to be another autonomous zone in Portland. Okay, And I would have him explain what he means by lawful. I want to know what he means, doesn't mean what you and I mean. I can tell you exactly right now, exactly right, okay. Well you know I would say, you know what we live. It's now the it's the error of anarchists and radicals. They're just taken over and they don't see this is the problem. Right. So there's a bunch of innocent people trying to just live their lives and raise their kids. And then you got Wheeler out there, free wheel in it. Pardon the pun. Let's let's have Wheeler handle it. You put together the police that you want, you put together the people that you want to enforce, the lawful exchange that you want to see happen, and then we'll talk. University. You gotta get vaccinated, but not if you're not if you're not white. Okay, well, why are we doing? Why are we deviding people at Cornell? Shouldn't they be one glorious student body and eventually would be proud Cornell graduates, an Ivy League school graduate. Well, I mean, I don't understand the written in discrimination in school policy. By the way, why are they making people get vaccinated anyway? That should be a personal medical choice between a student and their doctor. It's not like you're telling them to wear a mask in a classroom, which they I would say, have the right to do. Well, you're gonna you're gonna now demand that everybody get vaccinated, but not if you're not white. How does that bring people together? But that's what they're doing. It's you know, you can't even make this stuff up. Then you got this woman, Cynthia Johnson. We've been passing notes about this back and forth the whole day. Have you've been following this? Um? So let me let me just go back and play part of this and look, there's some context to it. But anyway, she's a member of the Michigan House of Representatives and she makes a call out to her soldiers to make you trump people pay now. As an original post she made, the comments got a lot of press pick up because she apparently has been getting threatening voicemails. I don't want anybody threatening anybody out there. Anyway, she started it with, you know, pretty ugly speech and anyone who criticized her. But anyway, while she does end the video with this threat, she says that the top be smart. You don't have to yell, you don't have to curse at anyone. Hit their asses in the pocketbook. And then she goes on to explain how the FBI found someone who wish your threats tot her. I don't want her to get threat I don't want anybody you're threatened. I mean, why don't we just leave people the hell alone. She's now been removed from her committee assignments, waiting further discipline action, according to some published reports. Now, but listen to what she says in this threat. You don't have to yell, you don't have to curse anybody else. You don't have to call people names, hit their asses in the pocket book. So this is just a warning to you trumpers, be careful, walk lightly. We ain't playing with you. Enough of the shenanigans. Enough it's enough. And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it, do it right, be in order make them pay. I love y'all. Do you know what to do? Do it right, make them pay. I don't know. Maybe maybe I'm just too maybe I'm become a snowflake. It sounds like a threat to me, Linda, Oh, it's a threat. Threat. But the problem is that we're not allowed to call it that because we're on the other side of the argument. How about a threat is wrong? Period, says they are conservatives out there threatening liberals. I would say, don't do it. I mean, this is what this is what we say to everybody, you know, So now we're creating this hatred and this horrible way of thinking is said of saying, hey, you're all children of God, and you should all love each other, we should all be kind to each other and stop trying to hurt each other because we all got to live here. There's none of that anymore. Now it's just a visiveness. But those days I think sadly are gone. And I mean sadly too. I mean you would think that every I know, everybody that like is a graduate or whatever school they went to, they're all proud of their university. They all. You know, I'm not proud. I didn't even walk niue individual. You're not normal. Let's put them on. Most normal people are. Usually they're proud they graduated, and they're one. You know, if you are well whatever, you know, you name the school, whatever your mascot happens to be, you know, you just identify with it, and it's something that people have in common. It's not about the racial component of this man. It's like, you know, one glorious Cornell family. Apparently forget it. Let's go to Christian in California. What's up, Christian? How are you? I wish I could say that I was good, but I'm really not. Your heart is trouble. What's up? I'm in I'm in trouble. I live in Sherman Oaks and my wife and I are moving my son from preschool to kindergarten above and we are crossing off schools faster than we can find them. That is teaching the anti racist critical race theory curriculum, which is now come in this new form of Pollyanna curriculum, which everyone needs to learn about right away. There was this like Pollyanna conference. It took place at the biggest dependent private schools out here, and it literally it sounds fluffy, and then you get the second page. It's like to teach your child's racial identity and the racial identity of others. And it's great. K through eight, it is beyond disturbing. There's a school the look. I've covered a lot of this, I've seen this and it's happening everywhere. You know what, the hardest and saddest thing in all of this is, how about you just teach kids to respect other kids and leave them alone. And that's easy to do and keep it basic. And then how about we focus on reading, writing, math, and some version of normal history that is accurate, and we don't do the simple, basic things. And they spend all this time on all of this other stuff, and you know, it's like it's I'm not really understanding what the purpose of it is except the term. You know, kids, Indoctrinate them and a good little socialist as quickly as you possibly can, because this may be the only opportunity you have and to group think and to you know, total complete conformity. But at the same time, don't ever think about mentioning God in school. That's too controversial. Kick him out. It's if you're gonna tell out. Just teach the simple value of love God and your neighbor as yourself. I guess you have to eliminate God. How about your treat your neighbor as yourself? Pull keep it there and leave everybody. Then stick to the reading, writing, math and history, and let's get our kids educated so they have the rungs of the latter that they can climb and tap their God given abilities and live life and be the best they can be whatever they choose to do. All right, Hennan's tonight nine eastern on the Fox News Channel. Say, DVR love this statement. Under Biden. I learned yesterday the US Attorney's office in Delaware advised my legal counsel they are investigating my tax affairs. I take it seriously. Okay, And Joe is deeply proud of his son who gets all these millions with zero experience. Ally, we'll have the latest on that the election, Kaylee Mcinanny, Laura Trump, Pete Hegseth, Congressman Gates, Joints, us Leo Terrell, Rick Rinnell, Chris Kobak, and Rins. Previous news you won't get from the mob nine Eastern tonight. We'll see then back here tomorrow. Thanks for being with us,