All right, glad you with us Sean Hannity Show. Right down our toll free telephone number. It's eight hundred ninety four one Sean if you want to be a part of the program. By the way, a lot of people are liking we do these these hits on Foxnation dot com sometimes on our brakes or after the show, and everybody seems to really like it. It's like one of the more popular things that they have on Foxnation dot com. And it's different. You get to see the radio studio what we do well, we did the Linda always wants to do Twitter Live, Facebook Life. I'm like, I like the mystery of radio. I don't have to worry about my hair. I'm wearing right now a Fireman T shirt like I always do about ten of them. It's not the same one. I alternate every day and anyway, we'll see you know. Matt Tibby writes for Rolling Stone, writes a piece today headline the press will learn nothing from the Russia Gate fiasco. And it's interesting because there are some people now on the left that they're not coming out and really saying it, but they're admitting it that they've been wrong, and the press has been wrong, and they're recognizing the psychosis, the mass group think, etc. And they're like realizing and recognizing a truth and the damage that is being created. Both Democrats some are are seeing it. And in the media, the medium mob, part of the medium mob, people that have been a part of it. I mean, for the Washington Post to allow an article that, well, you're just gonna have to admit Fox News was right kind of is a little bit funny, a little bit humorous. Or now the New York Times or Bob Woodward, We've got to take this dossier thing more seriously. Let me tell you why they're saying it now and why they haven't been where we have been, which has been very obvious. It's not been hard to find where we are for the last two years. You gotta you basically have to do good old fashion you know reporting, you know, get out there, make phone calls, talk to people, get sources, try and get information. Oh, it was funny because I was mentioned in the Muller report. You see all these stories coming out. Oh, they asked Ryan's previous when did you first find out about the Trump Tower meeting? Now they asked him that the story broke in the New York Times a year after the meeting occurred, the one that was so often talked about, you know, the one about the Magnitsky Act that ended up being about Russian adoption. The one we found out that the woman was connected to Fusion GPS. I believe founder. I'm not sure it was Simpson. I know, you know she met with Fusion GPFS people both before and after the Trump Tower meeting, and all these nefarious things were supposed to happen. Everybody at the meeting said it was a dull waste of time. That's all they said, and kept repeating it. So they put So Ryns was asked, and I was surprised by this. When did you first hear about the meeting? He goes, well, actually, a week before The New York Times broke it, I got a call from my friend Sean Hannity, and Sean Hannity said, I'm hearing all this buzz and this noise on some meeting that might have occurred with Trump Tower and Russians. What's that all about? And so I did not have all these people say why didn't you go with the story. I guess now they're viewing me as the great investigative journalist that we know our team is. And they're saying because I didn't have the story wrapped up yet, I didn't have all the sources. I didn't have all I didn't have all the details, but I had heard rumblings of it, and I know Sarah and John had been working on it. They were still at Circuit News at the time, and and I all I had heard was chattered, no details, no specifics, just noise, as you call it. And then when you hear noise like that, you kind of start digging a little bit. And I was really I was calling right when I'm hearing about this, what do you know about it? That's basically how the conversation went. See all these articles, But what had Sean Hannity had the story and he held it back. I'm like it was First of all, it was a year after the meeting and one week before The New York Times broke open the story, which means that probably everybody was talking about behind the scenes, all sources there. You know, sources are often shared, or maybe it just means that my sources were a little bit better than the New York Times, and maybe I was a week ahead of them. I don't know what. I don't know how to interpret that. A year after the actual meeting, I didn't know anything about the meeting nothing. I just said, what is this noise? Why? Why do I keep hearing this keep coming up? And I know exactly some of the areas I remember some of the areas I haven't heard the noise from. But you know, I had to have my memory wreck collected, recollected, you know, just joke. I'm joking. But so Timmy writes this piece Rolling Stone, and you know, it's a great question, but it's a sad statement that the press is gonna learn nothing from all of this, you know. And he talks about February fifteen, twenty sixteen National Review on Precedent and Action. I remember this well, all out pleaded Republicans to stop Trump before it was too late. By the way, has there ever been a more conservative governing president in our lifetime? Well, not really. You have Reagan and now Trump. In terms of justices, Oh, promise, made promise, kept tax cuts the highest in history, regulation deregulation, you never had anything like this. His positions on foreign policy is economic success speaks for itself. None of these people in the press ever talk about it. So many people, even I had conservative friends, you know, saying I don't see him governing as a conservative. I said, well, I kind of know the guy, and yeah, I know. He donated to politicians in both parties when he was in New York as a builder. And he even said publicly, sadly, that's how the system works. You want to keep building, Oh, you have to go to Uncle Joe's party, or you gotta go to this person's party. And you're gonna act like he even liked them and care about them because they have the ability to shut down, oh, your entire business. It's horrible the way the system works. Anyway, So they would calling themselves never Trumpers, the Conservatives against Trump, and there were many of them, you know, the names of a lot of them. There's no point going over that again. And conservative media, you know, we were out there like we often are. We take our own position. We did our own vetting of Obama. Many nobody else really in the media went his heart, about his background, associations, his ideology's thought process, going into his books, going into his church of twenty years, going into where he started his political career. And we did it because we just thought and knew what was the right thing to do. And I came to a very very firm conclusion on who Obama was. And I felt that Obama was an indoctrinated, rigid, pretty radical ideologue who was hiding his radicalism and never showed any propensity or willingness to even entertain other ideas. That was my conclusion, and it turned out right. He still believes he was a great president. He doesn't want to hear about anything negatives. It's eight years he's president, and he was still blaming George W. Bush for the economy that he inherited. He doesn't understand economies, he doesn't understand peace through strength. He appointed liberal justices to the Supreme Court. So with now that we have the Mueller Report, and it can't be any more clear what Tibby is asking. You know, it's shocking to see national media voices after the release of Robert Muller's report patting each other on the back, congratulating themselves for a three year face plant they must know will haunt the whole business for a long time. I don't think Matt, I don't think they do. I don't think Matt's a fan of mine. But this is a thoughtful column fake news. Muller isn't buying it, writes David Bowder Associated Press. He noted that, with a few exceptions, Muller investigation repeatedly supports news reporting that it was done on the Russia probe over the last two years. I don't know where bowders coming from here. Otherwise, intelligent guy. He doesn't like me either. I don't think anybody in the media likes me. I had a complex. I would be coming out anyway. Bowder added, the report showed several instances where the president and his team sought to mislead the public. That would be the news media. David, how do you miss this? He actually congratulated the New York Times in Washington Post. All they did was say this is a slam dunk Russia collusion the whole time. That's all they said. And he said about Trump, he called fake news, folks, fake news. It wasn't and neither were. Some of these stories in the coverage is mind boggling. Listen to these people now patting themselves on the back. I need a drink. This was an investigation at its core about Donald Trunk's daily sometimes hourly assault on the rule of law in this country. As the country's chief executive, he sat in his pajamas watching Fox and Friends maligning the FBI. Bill gard didn't walk into that room with the scale at zero rule of law, how to deficit because Donald Trump had been kicking it in the teeth. Can I just talk about this issue of the president's concerns about leagues. You know who else was concerned about leagues, Richard Nixon. This report is a gift to the government of Russia. This is a very proud moment for Vladimir Putin. For the amounts information that relates to collusion and obstruction activity is really quite expensive in the s of courtion. There's significant there's a there's significant material in here that we did not know on the question of collusions. It's here in substance, in nuance, in context, and it's there. It's all a lie. Everything that they say that they found they didn't get it. Four times now, no collusion And for all these people. Here's the great irony in all of this to me is Hillary Clinton literally making the statement and saying that, oh, this is outrageous substruction of justice. Donald Trump and she had an underlying crime a slam dunk case. It's the Espionage Act. She warned every other State Department employee to not do what she herself was doing. That it's a violation of law and a felony. And then we know after the underlying crime what the intent was to erase, bleach, bit destroy and take out sim Card. I mean, you couldn't be And they're not stopping now. Lindsey Graham's going to join us later. You know, he talked about, well, there's going to be a stampede to impeach Donald Trump. I don't know if it gets there, it doesn't really matter. It won't matter. Now the president has been the single most cooperative of any president modern history with an investigation. M sorry, I know, I got this tickle in my throat, single most And he's now saying he's gonna fight all subpoenas. Remember he never ever used executive privilege, not one time. He let every single employee go testify that Mueller wanted over at the Special Counsel's office. He let this for all the talk about obstruction because he said it's a witch hunt and that he wanted to fire. Muller told something, I want you to fire Muller, and they didn't do it. Now I want to get rid of Rosenstein. Never did it. Well, just like the Special Counsel's Office, they were gonna secretly tape a president of the United States, they didn't do it, or invoke the twenty fifth Amendment. They didn't do it. Now the President saying enough and he's gonna fight every subpoena. Now he'll use executive privilege. Democrats now they want Trump to They want to impeach the Arrest Commissioner that they're trying to embolden and empower as a weapon against Trump and turn over the tax returns. Elijah Cummings now wants to hold the White House witnessesn't contempt. Naddler wants to jail all Trump officials who won't comply with this Abenas all of these people have done this before. How much cooperation should any one administration give when we know the answer? The answer has been given four times. Hey, Jason, you got Hillary going on about obstruction because this cracks me. She's wrong on so many different levels. Let's play it. You're a lawyer. Did Donald Trump obstruct justice? As you read the incidences as Muller lays them out. Well, I think there's enough there that any other person who had engaged in those acts would certainly have been indicted. But because of the rule in the Justice Department that you can't indict a sitting president. Stop right there. The Attorney General bar made the determination, along with the Office Illegal Counsel, along with Attorney Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, of all people, not with any consideration over the question of whether you can or cannot the evidence did not rise. But you want to talk about any other person, any Christian Saucier took six pictures inside a submarine, violated the Espionage Act, never shared those pictures with anybody, was just pride of where he worked for the Navy in the submarine and got a year in jail the Espionage Act, and that was an underlying crime. Do any of you do you think other people that have subpoened emails Hillary thirty three thousand, You delete them, your acid washed the hard drive with bleach bit, and you bust up your devices and aid does with a hammer in case there's any emails on them, and you take out the simcards. Is it after you have top secret classified information on a server that you told your own staff in the State Department never to do or have if it's a violation of law twenty five. Now until the top of the hour, eight hundred nine for one, Sean Tolfrey, telephone them. All right, Jason, let's go back to the beginning. I'm gonna let it play out in full. But okay, if we're gonna talk about how everybody else would be treated, well, there is no greater example than the dual system of justice we have. Then this even Struck in page we're mocking about Hillary Clinton. The idea that fixes in being run by Loretto Lynch, the same Retto Lynch that met with her husband, the same Loretta Lynch that called it a matter not an investigation. The interview was done by Peter Struck, who said that Hillary should win one hundred million to zero. Let me tell you, when you're being investigated and you're being interviewed by the FBI, you don't get to have friends in the room, now, lawyers, friends like happening in her case. You don't get to have that one hundred million to zero because Trump is loathsome and we have an insurance policy. You know, think to yourself, just the obstruction alone think to yourself, remember the freedom of information our request and Tom Finton and Judicial Watch and how they were able to what discover when they found out that really there really was top secret classified information. They only sampled forty emails. They were freaked out because of the impact that this could have on foreign policy, our relations with other countries, sources and methods, people's lives potentially put in jeopardy. So there were a lot more. And if you did what she did, disappointed emails, you know you'd be in jail. I said it to Alan Dershowitz, is that could you get me out of prison if I did this? I'm a good lawyer. I'm not that good. Listen to what's the lawyer? Did Donald Trump obstruct justice? As you read the incidences as Mueller lives about, Well, I think there's enough there that any other person who had engaged in those acts would certainly have been indicted, but because of the rule in the Justice Department that you can't indict a sitting president. The whole matter of obstruction was very directly sent to the Congress. I mean, if you read that part of the report, it could not be clearer. I mean, you know, as I read it Basically what I thought it was saying is, look, we think he obstructed justice. Here are eleven examples of why we think he obstructed justice. But we're under the control of the Justice Department, and their rule is you can indict. That's not the rule, by the way, you know, in the sense that that was not the consideration at all, and they went out of their way to tell us that. I mean the whole thing here. And it's interesting because in a piece that was on Foxnews dot Com, the Whitewater Independent Council Robert Ray explained why he believes Hillary's exactly wrong in the claim that Trump would have been indicted if he warn't President. Ray said he believes the report disputes that, adding that bar speaking to the Special Counsel Muller prior to the release of the report, report and his press conference, which went into specific details, you know, also corroborate why the decision was made because it didn't rise to the level of obstruction. Look at what there is saying here. Well, he said to something, I want to fire Muller. Fire Muller. Okay, he said it often. He called it a witch hunt. He was he was obstructing. Well, there's no underlying client crime. What was he obstructing? And remember you need intent to obstruct. There was no we know the intent behind the emails. It was to obstruct and destroy evidence. And what was a real underlying crime? Crimes? Felonies? You know when Ray said, he believes that the report disputes all of it. And that's why the Attorney General, before the report was released to the public, went back to the Special Council, apparently on more than one occasion. And he said Ray said during a appearance on Fox and Friends, and he continued claiming the purpose of going back to Muller was to inquire about whether the reason why Trump was not indicted is that he's a sitting president. The answer that came back is no, that's not what I'm saying, meaning Muller was poorly written. Also, it was like it was a political document, and I sensed that Muller probably had just a conclusion and told others to write it up. Who knows if he even read it. And so I know people in some quarters don't want to listen to what the Attorney General actually said. But while that is a reasonable question, Hillary's got it exactly wrong. That's not the reason. You know, so, I know people in some they don't want to listen to this. And the former prosecutor's comments came amid clinton remarks during the Time one hundredth summit in New York on Tuesday, in which she said that Trump would have been indicted by the Special Council if he weren't president. I think there's enough there, blah blah blah blah. Ray went on to say, unlike Trump, Clinton has to think to thank Departmental policy former FBI Director Coome's discretion for not charging her with the crimes that we have laid out on new shows so many times. Either way, it's going to all happen. And I'm gonna tell you the order in which, well I'm not sure exactly the order, but we're gonna get the FISA application issue dealt with, likely with criminal referrals involved, because this was a fraud committed on the FISA court. It's not in dispute anymore. I mean, Neunez Grassley Graham memos said the bulk of information in the FISA application, they did not specifically say the opposition party candidate paid for it. And then we're gonna get the fises themselves and all those people that signed those FISA applications are gonna have to answer question. The bottom line is does it rise to the level. Okay, well, he wanted to get rid of Rosenstein, he wanted Sessions out. He's frustrated. It's a witch hunt. You know. It goes back to the famous Tray Gouty question if you're if you're not guilty, damn it, act like you're not killing. How does one act when they're not guilty. I think tray Gouty was going after Trump at the time because Trump was speaking out about his innocence. I actually think that is the reaction of innocent people. They want to speak out about their innocence, and more often than not, if you have an attorney involved in this, they tell you, no, don't be quiet, don't talk, don't say anything. Let us do the talking. I mean, it's it's very common. Frustrates many many innocent people. Okay, you know, think of this when and I've said this before that I have friends of mine that tell me in the FBI, no, no, no, you can never talk to the FBI. I'm like, we would no, No No, I want to help the FBI. My gut is to help the FBI. This is the world's premier law enforcement agency by far, still is, except because of the actions of a very few, it's been tarnished. We have the best intel people in the entire world. They worked tirelessly day and night to keep we, the American people safe. You had a few bad actors. Now everybody's worried. Look, I'm not even sure at the end of this suffisas survives because of the abuse, misuse, the fraud, and how the court you know, what are the consequences of that. No, we got a lot of questions here that have to be answered. One of them is the Ukraine. Rudy Giuliani has been saying, and John Solomon's been reporting, the Ukrainian officials are seeking to give the United States their evidence because they are admitting publicly they sought to undermine Donald Trump in the twenty sixteen election, and we're working on behalf of Hillary Clinton. They did it by questioning his fitness for office. Also worked behind the scenes to secure a Clinton victory. That's Ukraine. I thought he didn't like foreign countries influencing our elections, but I guess it only matters to the media if in fact it happens to be Donald Trump. They're not interested in anybody else, you know, They're only interested in getting Cavanaugh. They're not interested in the lieutenant governor of Virginia. I'm gonna keep saying that every day. Somebody's got to hear it in Virginia. They're gonna let this go. And Terry mccauloff wants to run for president, apparently he's backing out. Now we have other news here. And what about Bernie's collusion. This is a good point. Donald Trump spent his honeymoon of a former Soviet union in the eighties, during which he engaged in diplomatic outreach efforts to the Soviet Union and up to an including establishing a sister city program with a Moscow suburb. That collusion. You know what I think Rudy's right now. Ukraine is investigating Hillary's campaign, the DNC conspiracy with foreign operatives, including Ukrainian officials and others to affect the twenty sixteen election. Wow, and there's no comy to fix the result. He rights. This is getting interesting more interesting by the day, And I think by the time we get to the truth, you're going to be shocked at what you find Oh, by the way, poor Beto rourke, the officer in beatos Dui case, claims that he fled the scene. No doubt he fled the scene is in the Washington Examiner. Former police officer who arrested Robert Francis Beato Bozo O'Rourke, the chief skate he only gave less than point three percent of his earnings the last ten years to charity. I mean, why had liberals only generous with other people's money. Our claimed at a debate against Ted Cruz last year that he did not leave the scene while he was in toxic I did not try to leave the scene of the accident, though driving drunk, which I did, is a terrible mistake for which there is no excuse or justification of defense. I will not try to provide one. But the police officer who arrested then twenty six year old Robert Francis now retired. He told the Texas Tribute when he remembers the incident quite differently. Oh yeah, we have contradicting stories here. I stand by my report, and he supervisor who signed the incident report said O'Rourke did something to the lead the officers to believe that he was trying to get away what they put down. I believe them, of course, you believe them. Probably Robert Francis did it all. Kamala Harris now is backing off I see on voting rights for terrorists. I mean, she's flipping and flopping and flailing all over the place. I think we should have the conversation. Do I think people that commit murder, people who are terrorists should be deprived of they? Right? Yeah, that's how it changes. Just to let's put my finger in the air and I'll tell you what I think on any given day. Say what you will about Donald Trump, that's not him. He's stood by his governing agenda and fights for every item on the list. And here's an interesting development in the quest for the twenty twenty nomination, and this was on Fox News that Barack Obama plans to remain on the sidelines right now in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. Two sources familiar with Obama's thinking say the former president has made clear he does not plan on endorsing early in the primary process, if at all. They add that the Obama prefers to let the candidates make their cases directly to voters. And that former First Lady Michelle Obama feels the same way. He's not likely to endorse in a primary. According to a source. He believes that the Democratic Party to move on, voters have to pick the leaders. Wow, crazy creepy uncle Joe. Don't want to be tied to him any closer. He's clean and articulate. Wow that storybook man. And speaking of creepy crazy Joe, just when Biden butt it was safe to go start sniffing hairs and rubbing noses and shoulders again. While the woman who kicked off the Biden gropegate scandal has re emerged from the shadows, and The Hill reports Lucy Flores, this Nevada state legislator accused Biden of inappropriate touching in twenty fourteen. You know is back and now saying frankly to me, it demonstrated that his promise to take this very seriously, that he was gonna listen, that he was going to learn to learn to me, that indicated he didn't mean that at all. She said, incredibly disrespectful that he said at a touching event, crazy creepy uncle Joe. Now this is interesting if you look at the AFLCIO president Richard Trumka, saying that he opposes the Green New Deal champion by Acasio Cortez these presidential candidates, is asked during a forum at the nonprofit Economic Club of DC about the proposal, and he said that has currently written. The proposal is a bad, bad idea. None of your guys will ever work again. And you better pay attention to what Comrade de Blasio is doing if you care about your workers. Why we're finding other subpoenas. Look, these aren't like impartial people. The Democrats are trying to win twenty twenty. They're not going to win with the people that I see, and they're not gonna win against me. The only way they can maybe luck out. I don't think that's gonna happen. It might make it even the opposite. That's what a lot of people are saying. The only way they can look out is by constantly going after me or nonsense. But they should be really focused on legislation, not the things that have been This has been litigated. Just so you understand, this has been litigated for the last two years, almost since I got into office. Now, if you want to litigate, go after the DNCNE Crooked Hillary the dirty cops, all of these things. That's what should be litigated because that was a rigged system. And I'm breaking down. I am breaking down the swamp. If you look at what's happening, they're getting caught, they're getting fired. Who knows what's going to happen from now on, but I hope it's I hope it's very strong. But if you look at drained the swamp, I am draining the swamp. Thank you very much. All right. That was the President earlier today our two Sean Hannity Show eight hundred and nine for one Sean Tolfrey telephone number. You want to be a part of the program. President, the most cooperative of any investigation ever going on in a modern day presidency. And by the way, that includes Barack Obama, that includes the Clintons, all of that include George W. Bush's administration. They all exerted executive privilege. This president, none, not once, nobody. I could not believe the idea that the White House General Counsel Don McGinn spent thirty hours with Muller and he seems to think that he's the one that saved the republic. Not exactly. If Donald Trump had it even within his authority to fire Muller under Article two of the Constitution. He could have fired him just because you're complaining about a witch hunt, that's not obstruction. Just because or complaining about Rod Rosen, that's not and it's a witch hunt, that's not obstruction, none of it. So now that we have the look at what the Democrats are moving in a thousand different directions because they can't accept now the fourth definitive investigation that says no Trump Russia collusion. First, the FBI nine month investigation, even struck In Paige said nope, we had nothing. No, they're there. Then of course we have the House Intel Committee their investigation, Nope nothing, and we have the Bipartisan Senate Committee, Nope nothing. Now the Muller report can't be any more clear on any of these issues. Well then well, well let's weaponize the irs. But no real reason at all except that let's go after his taxes. That'll we'll get him there. I'm sure there's a reason why he was audited all those years anyway, So now they want to impeach the i RS Commission or for not turning over Trump's Elijah Cummings wants to hold stonewalling White House witnesses in contempt on the same issue unbelieved Nadler wants to jail Trump officials who won't comply with his subpoenas. Why are they going to pay for the attorneys in DC? A thousand dollars an hour for a decent attorney, maybe eight hundred if you're lucky, six hundred if they give you a cut rate. But these people have all been interviewed. Maxie Waters claims America's clamoring for impeachment. No, now, Lindsey Graham is going to join us at the bottom of the half hour. He's gonna be telling us where his investigation is going to be going, and also that he believes there's going to be a Democratic Party stampede stampede to impeach the president. Anyway, here to sort through all the legal issues on all of this, we have Alan Dershowitz, who Professor Harvard, and he contributed an introduction to Skyhorse Publishing's edition The Muller Report, Greg jarrett Is best seller The Russia Hoax. All right, I want to ask you both. Here's where I think we've got to go in this. We now have evidence that Hillary's investigation was rigged from the beginning. Even struck in page recognize such eighteen USC. Seven ninety three, the Espionage Act is clear. That's the underlying crime, the intent to take some pen at emails to lead thirty three thousand of them, bleach bit your hard drive, eliminate the evidence, speed up your devices, remove sim cards. That would be an intent to obstruct. I think we got to make that one bucket Number two. We got to get into the whole five's abuse. The Inspector General will weigh in on that was their fraud committed to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. We also have to get into the spying of the Trump campaign stefan helper, who enlisted them, etc. And we need to get into the whole issue of why did we have a three hundred and fifty percent an increase in unmasking American citizens in twenty sixteen. That's an important bucket. Then we've got to get the release of the FIS warrants Gang of eight information three OZ two's as we've been telling you, five buckets there. Then we've got to get into the question of okay, those people that tried to undo an election and bludgeon a president. When did they know that there was no collusion and why didn't they investigate Hillary's dirty dossier, which The New York Times suggests this week could have been all disinformation to create chaos from the beginning. We'll start with you, Professor Dershowitz. Where do we go next? Well, I think the most important thing is the way in which the Fizer Court was misled. We now know for certain that the information provided to the Fiser Court in the X party application was incomplete. It was not the whole truth. It was a half truth, and a half truth is a lie. And I think there should be an investigation conducted by the Inspector General apparently that's going on, but also by the Fizer Court itself. The FISA Court was misled, and I think there was a contempt of court committed by those A who submitted the PIES application without indicating the source, and B failed to correct the FISA application once they got more information about the source, and indeed sort renewals of the FISA application. So those are I think very important areas for any civil libitarian because remember, PHIZA warrants can be issued against any of us, and if it can be done without any consequence based on misleading and incomplete information, then we're all victims. And so I think you start with anything that involves every American potentially a victim of a violation of civil liberties. That has to be the first order of business. Do you think the President is right? Before I get to Greg Professor, the President is right saying, you know what, You've had your four investigations. We're going to fight every thing now. Never used the executive privilege. He could have. It could have prevented people from talking to Muller. He could have fired Mueller, by the way, I think he'll even agree he could have done so legally under his authority under Article too without a doubt. And in the introduction to my book, I go through the whole obstruction of justice argument presented by Mueller. Mueller turns out to be dead wrong on the law. He has some idea that if in fact the President had decided to fire Mueller, indeed, firing come he thinks could be an obstruction of justice. He just has the law wrong. By the way, on the Amazon reviews, everybody's ganging up on me. All the anti Trump people are writing terrible reviews. Saying I never should have been allowed to do the introduction to the book because I'm objective and honest and non partisans. So I urge any of you who read my introduction and who think differently write a review saying my introduction is objective, it's nonpartisan. I end by saying I would have written the same review, the same introduction if the shoe had been on the other foot, if Hillary couldn't have been impeached improperly or been subject to an investigation improperly, I would have been defending her as well. I am not defending Trump on a partisan basis. I'm defending civil liberties and constitutional rights. Greg Jarrett, Well, I want to say, I just ordered Professor's book and I anxiously look forward to reading The Obstruction of Justice. Why doesn't he just give us a free copy? I mean, we're friends. You trying to get a free copy, or you have to write a review and get a free copy. You got it. Deal. But you know this is why prosecutors should never comment on uncharged crimes. It's unfair to the uncharged person. Mueller went out of his way to smear Trump with the patina of a crime that he couldn't prove Mueller didn't find sufficient evidence for an obstruction charge. He had he would have said so. So what he does is he turned the law completely upside down and he says, well, I couldn't prove the president didn't obstruct. You know, prosecutors are not in the business of exoneration. There in the business of proving crimes based on evidence. Muller couldn't prove an obstruction And when Coomy went after Hillary Clinton that way, we all objected. Democrats and Republicans a life. Why is it different when Mueller goes after people who have not been charged and sets out non criminal conduct that he disagrees with. That's just not the proper function of If Muller could not prove an obstruction crime, and he could not, then he should have simply stated that he wasn't recommending any charges. Anything other than that is blatantly unfair. I agree, I agree. Let me let me asking this is Trump to clear when it's done to Trump? Is Trump right not to cooperate any further? Considering there's been four separate conclusions and investigations on this, well, you know he has to listen to his lawyer on this I think that he would. I would certainly advise them not to testify. My advice to him was don't don't pardon, don't fire, don't testify, and don't tweet. He listened to three of them, but not the fourth. But right now, I would say, it depends. If you think the investigations by Congress are improperly motivated and don't have a legitimate legislative purpose, you have no obligation not to raise your constitutional privileges. And remember, executive privilege is designed to protect all Americans, not just the president. It's designed to protect the president c from improper intrusion by the legislative or the judicial branch. And so it's there as part of our separation of powers and checks and balances to protect all Americans. He's not just doing it in a self serving way. Right. Nadler is now taking a position, well, you've waived the privilege because mcgant spoke with a special counsel, no as special counsel, as an employee of the Department of Justice. So you've got one branch of the Department of Justice, White House counsel talking to another branch of the executive So it's not a waiver of a privilege at all. You can actually never waive executive privilege. It's been invoked by almost every president. The first was George Washington who invoked it. All right, when we get back, I want both of you to debate the question as to what we do with a Hillary Clinton question and how far back who needs to be held accountable? Right as we were all along, Alan Dershwitz, Greg Jarrett with us, All right, what are your thoughts on the president challenging these of painas who's going to win this battle? Greg Jarrett? Well, I think the President will because it does appear that this is nothing more than presidential harassment. You know, there has to be a reasonable basis for this. That is to say, there has to be some sort of articulable, factual basis for the investigation that indicates that the crime has or or will take place. Well, there's none of that here. This is a fishing expedition, a safari to search for anything under any rock they can find to damage Trump. I think the president has a solid legal basis to oppose it. What do you think, Alan Dershoy I have a slightly different view. I think that if subpoenas come from the legislative branch. They don't have to be looking for crime. They can be looking for information relevant to their appropriate role of legislating and oversight. But there comes a time, and it happened during the McCarthy or when the Supreme Court or other courts will look at subpoenas and look at request for testimony and say, enough's enough. You've now exceeded your legitimate authority and you're just doing this to harass or expose. Well, are we there aper function of Congress? I think, don't you think we're to a point? Professor? Come on, well, no, that's the point. And I think the courts will look at it on a case by case basis. They're not going to just say willie nilly that no subpoenas will be enforced. They'll look at every subpoena. They'll look at whether there's an articular basis for any legitimate legislative purpose, and I think they will begin to refuse to enforce some of them, as they did during the McCarthy periy. But what about all these what about all these one what about all these people that are going to be called back again? They can't afford these lawyers that are very expensive. Listen, professor, what do you charge in our a lot? You know, you don't want to know. Half of my cases are pro bonal. The half are pretty expensive because I do present a lot of very wealthy people, and even if you're wealthy, getting these subpoenas can really really be very expensive. Washington lawyers do charge in excess of a thousand dollars an hour, and the hours accumulate because you have to do the research, you have to check out all the facts, and so we're talking easily about six figure legal bills that can sometimes get up to the seven figures. Yeah, Greg, Yeah, I mean, look at people like Jerome. Course, he was never charged with anything. He was threatened. They tried to pressure and extort him into signing a false statement implicating Trump, which would have been a lie. You know, that's the equivalent of attempting to suborn perjury. He had to hire a team of lawyers to represent him, you know, and his bank account is empty as a results. Look at General flinting wrong, Yeah, both mccabegging, He doesn't need a lawyer, then call me bragging, Huh, I wouldn't do this and Obama or Bush administrations, top two FBI guys. They're setting him up, I mean, professor, and then he loses his house. Now he's millions of dollars in debt. They threatened to go after his kid. This is how we treat thirty three year veterans that put their lives in harm's way. Look, it's a terrible, terrible thing, and it's been a terrible thing for many years that prosecutors do abuse their authority. You know, the idea of arresting people at gunpoint, whether it be somebody who is like a stone or somebody who is Felicity Huffman, whatever you think of them. You don't have to arrest people at gunpoint and threaten them and show how powerful and strong you are. And you don't have to. I got a run into them. You can write them a nice letter saying if you have any information, please provide it. But you know it turns to harassment at some point, and all right, I gotta let you both go. Thank you, Professor Dershowitz, Thank you Greg, Jared Lindsay Graham. Next, this was an investigation at its core about Donald Trump's daily, sometimes an hourly assault on the rule of law in this country. As the country's chief executive, he sat in his pajamas watching Fox and Friends maligning the FBI. Bill Gard didn't walk into that room with the scale at zero rule of law, how to deficit because Donald Trump had been kicking it in the teeth. Can I just talk about this issue of the president's concerns about leaks, Well, Jake, what I did is I looked on my shelf for the Watergate Senate Watergate Committee report. I looked at the Iran Contra report. I also looked at the ken Star report, which is too bragged big to bring to the set here. It's four volumes, over two thousand words, and I've got to tell you I've read all those and in four hundred words, mister, this report from their Special Council is more damning than all of those reports about a president. Right. That is the predictable freak out of course by the left wing media Democrats. They cannot accept now, four separate findings, no Russia collusion, none whatsoever. Anyway, joining us now is South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham. And well, you've been saying that in spite of four separate reports, and it's done and none of this is going to happen, that they're going to stampede towards impeachment anyway. Well, we can see the process now beginning to unfold before our eyes. And you know the predictable names and characters, Maxim Waters and you know Chairman Schiff and who by the way did collude and Nadler and the rest of them, they're going nuts. Well, so here's what I think you need to look for. Number One, the Muller report should be the last word on all things Russia and Trump, all things obstruction of justice. But it won't be. So there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. If you don't believe me as smaller, that's what started this whole mess as a too struction of justice. How can you say President Trump impeded the Mueller investigation. Give me one example of where Mueller was impeded from doing his job. Quite the opposite. You've got the best research team, probably on television. What I would like you to do for your show is to give a list of the things that the White House did to cooperate with Mueller. The number of documents, the number of people that were allowed to be interviewed, Ben Mueller. I would suggest in the history of the investigating of the presidency, nobody has been more cooperative than the Trump prosidency toward Mueller. We know they handed over almost one point five million documents, when we know this is the first time an administration is not invoked executive privilege. And can I just stop your right there? Okay? Obstruction of justice has to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Name and event that actually impeded Mueller from doing his job. You've just eat out one point five million documents turned over by the Trump administration dumor voluntarily, and they refuse to claim executive privilege at any stage in the process. How the hell is that obstructing justice? Can I ask you? You know, the people that are supposedly care about other people, you know much at cost when you have to hire a Washington, DC lawyer and you're a staff person that works for the president and they drag you in there ten fifteen, twenty hours. Now they want to drag you back again. And what asked the same questions over and over again just to come to a different conclusion where the evidence doesn't support it. What do you recommend? What point does this get labeled what it is. This is harassment. People can't afford these lawyers that are working for the government. Frankly, even senators and congressmen can't afford it. Well, hell no, I couldn't afford this. So I don't know if there's some fun we can create to help these people. But here's what's hell. How they all go in and plead the fifth and say it's over. I'm not used. I refer to my previous testimony. I don't know if that's a smart move, because you know, I don't think they've got anything to hide in criminally. But let me just say this. We'll deal with that issue. But what I want you to listeners to understand is that sometimes you and I have disagreed. I thought Mueller needed to be allowed to do this because there was a conflict with Sessions. He was brought the campaign, and I thought to make sure Mueller had the resources in the time to finish the job. He has now finished the job. President Trump came out of this thing great. He was cleared without any doubt about colluding with the Russians, and there was no effort by Trump to impede the Mueller investigation. So it's over for me. Now what do you have You have people taking the document and trying to turn it into an impeachment document. You have to really be unhinged and hate Trump to want to know more about the Mueller investigation. This is not about learning more, It is about getting a different outcome. They can't stand but that that Trump withstood two years, twenty five million dollars, forty FBI agents, two thousand subpoenas, whatever the numbers are, and he made it through. He's stripped them crazy. So they're unhinged and they're coming after Trump shine not because he did anything wrong, because they want to destroy his presidency. But this is where we are now. If it's not that well, let's move on to taxes. They want to now impeach the IRS Commissioner for not turning over Donald Trump's taxes. Elijah Cummings wants to hold the White House a White House witness in contempt of Congress. And by the way, this is also about you know, at some point every time you go under oath, you know that they're setting perjury traps for these people. Nadler wants to jail all Trump officials who won't comply with the subpoenas. The President has laid down his marker enough. He's not going to allow this anymore. And I think the President's right, and I also believe that he's on sound legal and constitutional footing that he does not have to cooperate anymore. Everything He's allowed everybody that they ever wanted to talk on these issues. Maxie Waters is claiming America's clamoring for impeachment. She's been clamoring for it before the election. Okay, we've gone from an inquiry based on a special council trying to find out if the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. Two years later, twenty five million dollars later, forty FBI agents later, we know the answer is no. So everything they're doing now is to try to destroy the Trump presidency and his family. This has got nothing to do with the truth, the rule of law. This is political revenge. What is playing out in front of us is using the power of the Congress to oversee the executive branch to use that power to destroy the president and his family. And if I were President Trump, I would fight back. If there's a site we could go to get money to help these people or in their crossfairs of this count me in. I'll write a check. Okay, So you now are an important member of the United States Senate with a lot of subpoena powering its powers itself. We now know that the General Counsel under Jim Comey, the FBI's top lawyer, thought that Hillary should be indicted. We know that Struck in page We're laughing because they knew the investigation was rigged, and Struck himself who said that Hillary should win one hundred million to zero because Trump is lowsome. He did the interview with Hillary and also allowed two friends of hers in the room at the time, which doesn't happen, and so we have that aspect. Then if we care about collusion, the Ukraine is now saying, well, we're guilty, we colluded with the Clinton campaign and offering us evidence. Nobody seems interested. Then you got the dirty Russian dossier that the New York Times even acknowledged this week could have very likely been as Hillary bought and paid for misinformation on purpose, and it was used as the foundation for the BISA warrants. When do we get those people in them accountable? Well, it's going to start. Bob Barr is excuse me, Bill Barr is going to testify the Attorney General may first before my committee in the Senate about his few of the Muller investigation, the decisions he's made, and why he made them. Then that ends it in the Senate and we're going to move on to four areas. I'm going to look at how the Clinton investigation was handled, not in a way to go back and put her in jail, but to find out why she was basically given them pass. Well that what if, what if it's proven that investigation was rigged and laws were broken, Well, that's why you need a special counsel. I don't want Lindsey Graham to do that. I want somebody outside of politics to look and see if there's criminal liability regarding the way the Clinton E MIL investigation was conducted. The second bucket is the counter intelligence counter intelligence investigation. I want to know what the a legitimate counterintelligence investigation or was it a ruse and backdoorway to get into the Trump campaign. I want to know about the fis a warrant, how it could be issued four times based on a bunch of political garbage. In the last bucket, I want to look at is why did they surveil General Flynn in transition, what was the purpose of prevailing the transition team? And was there an effort after the election to invoke the twenty fifth Amendment. Those are the four areas I'm going to look at. Well, we know that that's all true, that we have enough evidence and testimony to such. At this point, let me go back to all of these issues, because I think the evidence is clear, incontrovertible, It is overwhelming. And that is that the eighteen USC. Seven ninety three, the Espionage Act is clear. You cannot have secret, top secret classified information outside of a government server. It was put there. So you have multiple felon these it would be for every instance we've already Oh, here's what I would fright, I would say that that if you did what she did, would classified information could probably be in jail. But rather than Sean Hannity can in the investigation or Lindsey Graham for criminal liability, I am begging the Attorney General to assign somebody to this case for the very reasons you just suggested, independent of the political process, some mutual person to get this a look like they did Mueller did Trump. Well, I think that has to happen. Then I, you know, I actually think that a lot of things should happen even beyond that. All right, so you want there's four areas of interest the Clinton investigation. Why was the counterintelligence investigation started in the first place? Right? All evidence is now beginning to point that it started much earlier, not as we have been told. Julike, well, you know that you know them, probably more than me. And also we want to get the FISA warrants, the bulk of information of which was Hillary's bought and paid for Russian dirty dossier. And then you want to get to the issue surrounding General Flynn. Will we know he was illegally amasked, we know he was illegally surveiled, we know raw intelligence on the general was released, and I you know the fact that you know he's going bankrupt, sold his home, is a millions of dollars a debt, and has no idea what his future is going to be. You know, a great way to treat a thirty three year vet. And by the way, Comey and McKay bragging how they treated him and tricked him and told him he doesn't need a lawyer and they would never do this type of thing in the Obama or Bush White House. Wow, So let me just follow through that. Yes, I want to know what authority they had and what information to head evidence to suggest that they should surveil the transition team. I want to try to find out to leak the fact that Flynn was being surveiled to the Washington Post. Did Obama himself know about the counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign before the election. Did Obama himself know about the surveillance of the Trump transition team after the election? What was the basis of the surveillance, and go from there. I also think we've got to look into the abuse of intelligence. We had a three hundred and fifty percent increase in twenty sixteen in the unmasking of American citizens. That's a problem, Yeah, it is. And did the UN ambassador yea, she request unmasking, so three hundred times, but you say she didn't do it. Yeah, yeah, Well, so what I want to do is there's really three things going on there. Horwitz is looking at the defisal warrant process. His report should be out in the next thirty days. I hope I will take a look at it from a different point of view. He's looking at it from an in house council to try to find out who inside the FBIDJ needs to be disciplined. What I want to do is look at it to make sure it never happens again, change our laws if necessary, and hold people accountable in a different way. After the election, I want Horowitz or somebody including me to look at whether or not the surveillance of the transition team was lawful, legitimate, and was there an effort by DOJ types FBI types to try to invoke the twenty fifth Endment against newly elected President Trump. Wow, all right, we'll award to this. You won't believe this. You just promised me fill this as a movie. Well you can't. But if we don't hold them accountable, rigging investigations, trying to steal up again a presidential election and trying to basically undo an election using Russian wies is pretty amazing to me. And abusing power all along the way. All right, thank you so much. We appreciate it. Lindsey Graham, Senator South Carolina is with US eight hundred nine for one seawan Piers Morgan, by the way, he's going to weigh in of the Daily Mail later in the program today, we'll get to your calls also, and oh also we have a Texas town that's not going to prosecute crimes that they don't feel are not worthy of reprimand Okay, law and order, forget to forget that, we get that coequal branches of government thing. Stay right here for our final news round up and information overload in the final hour of the Sean Hannity Show. I think the right to vote is inherent to our democracy. Yes, even for terrible people. Because once you start shipping away and you said, well, luck I committed a terrible crime. Not gonna let him vote. Well that person did that, Not gonna let that person vote, You're running down a slippery slow. So I believe that people commit crimes, they pay the price when they got out of jail. I believe they certainly should have the right to vote. But I do believe that even if they are in jail, they're paying their price to society. But that should not take away they're inherent American right to participate in our democracy. Unbelievable. That's terrorists, the sarnav brothers, Boston bombing. Anyway, gladuate with US News round up, information overload our we welcome back to the program. A good friend of ours, Piers Morgan, is back with us. He heads up the Daily Mail UK and well he's a survivor of the fake News network. Just kidding, um, you know, um, how many views does the Daily Mail get on an average day because that website is so chock full of video, pictures, information, news, culture, sports, you got it all and it's an amazing operation. I'm actually editor in chief of the US part. Actually I do write for the UK one two, but the US one is the main, the main drawl now and the numbers are amazing. It's like two hundred and fifty million months of users now to this website. It's the biggest in this speaking newspaper website in the world. Has you know, well ever a thousand staff exclusive to the Online in New York and Los Angeles, in Sydney, Australia, big team in London and you know, it's a it's a remarkable operations show. And they put up fourteen hundred stories every day. Nothing stays up in its original condition for more than twenty four hours, so constantly rejuvenated, constantly updating. And I think most people who've come across it realized they're going to get all the news you could possibly want and every update as it happens twenty four seven. So the problem with the website, I like it so much. It's the way you put it up and you have all these sidebar you know, you know what I think. I don't want to read about the Kardashians. I'm like, all right, what are they up to? You know, you know what's fascinating. Actually, what's fascinating is they have a really smart algorithm system where stories you can see in real time how many people are reading each story, wow to the whole fourteen hundred, and it moves up, you know, there's literally like a Bloomberg stock screen, you know, go up and down in real time. So it's a really brilliant way of working out what your readers and viewers, if it's a video, what they really want to watch you'll read, and the team there in whichever city they're in, they can tailor everything in real time up and down depending on the volume of traffic for particular stories. So it's it's very scientific. You know, there's a lot of crazies. I assume you're still doing your morning show back in Great Britain. You have the number one morning show on television there, but you really are interested also just as much as I'm pretty much I'm well interested in the politics of our friends and Ally and Great Britain. And I cannot believe the Brexit matthe you guys are going through not a lot, not on similar to what we've got dealing with here in many ways, but like look at Bernie Sanders. We're gonna let the Sarna brothers vote. We're gonna let pedophiles well murder. I mean, there is a real parallel, you know, Sean, which really exercises me. And the parallel between Britain and America right now is that there is an inability by those on the left to accept democracy. So the people who profess to call themselves liberals and supposed to stand for everything that's democratic and for democratic freedoms and for honoring democratic elections and referendum so on, they're just simply refusing to do it. So in Britain we had the Brexit vote. Now, I full disclosure, voted to stay in the European Union. I wasn't completely sure that I was right in that vote, but I lost seventeen point four million Britains. And then, by the way, I know what that feels like because I didn't want Obama to winn and guess what I lost, right, right, So we know about winning and losing. Right In politics, there are winners and losers. It's very straightforward, has been for a long time in both our countries. But what happened in Britain was seventeen point four million people voted to leave against sixteen and a half million he voted to stay. It was a resounding victory for Brexit and for those who voted to leave. But here we are three years later and Parliament which is full of three quarters of the MPs, there are remainers who voted to stay in. They are doing whatever they can, driven by the liberal media to try and undo the result of that referendum and to try and stop us leaving the European Union. I see the same thing with Donald Trump here, from the moment he pulled off this extraordinary thing where he became the president with zero potical experience, all those on the liberal side who just refused to accept it, and they saw in Muller, for example, their white knight in shining armor, who was going to deliver their ultimate goal, which was to unseat the president of the United States. And to me, it's shocking, the undemocratic, it is pathetic, and it's the same in both countries, and it's the same times to Pele they are driving it. And the ultimate result of all this is that they want to bring socialists back into power in Britain and in America. In Britain Jeremy Corbyn, who's a very hard left socialist leader of the Labor Party. And in America obviously the front runner right now the Democrats is Bernie Sanders, again, a socialist there may survive in that situation because Donald Trump already has survived. Yeah, now they're gonna Look, there's a certain psychotic rage that has taken over not only the Democratic Party, but I mean, this whole New Green Deal and we get rid of oil and gas in ten years, and we're going to retrofit every building. And you can't make a skyscraper with steel and glass anymore in New York. And uh, we're going to eliminate the combustion engine, and and we'll eliminate eventually. Uh. We can't own a cow or eat cow. Maybe we can import it or you know, we won't be flying to Great Britain, We'll be getting on a sailboat to the pond. Right. Look, it's this the politics of the student common room, right, you know where students hang around when they're fifteen sixteen and they have very idea, idealistic view of the world, very simplistic view. They have not lived real life. I don't really understand how things work. And they're like, yeah, we're going to get rid of all student debt, we're gonna we're going to have green energy everywhere and get rid of everything that doesn't fit that agenda, so on and so on someone and then you say to the yib, well, how are you going to pay for any of this? And we have the same thing in Britain with this, so we're going to we're going to rid the world of all known diseases. Okay, great, we'd all love to do that. How are you going to do this? And when you get to the nuts and bolts of you know, Alexandra Acasia Cortez, for example, who wants to do everything immediately right on with the left agenda, that's fine, but when you actually ask her how do you pay for this? She doesn't know how to pay for it. There is no way of paying for other than bringing in, you know, nineteen nine percent income tax for aybody, which is completely unsustainable. So you know, there's there's a reality check coming for this. I think I think it's why Donald Trump one. I think he's why he's enduringly popular with vastuays of American people. I think it's why in Britain Brexit, what's happened there which is fascinating. Is it because of Theresa May's inability to get a group of this situation. Nigel Farage, who was one of the main people leading a chart for Brexit, has now created a new party called the Brexit Party. And guess what they are now leading in the European election polls which are due in a few weeks time. Prime Minister. I think they're going to win, and I think the Prime Minister will have to resign. And the smart money right now in Britain is it Boris Johnson, who is somebody who also along with character, led Brexits. I call him Donald Trump with an ability to speak fluent Latin, so he's highly intellectual to a point of pomposity. He's a great character. He's very you know, he's quite roguish in many ways, but he's a guy a bit like Trump, who speaks his mind, says what he thinks, and he has a relatability to regular people. I think my prediction is, even though they try to kick the Brexit can down the road till October, my prediction is that the Brexit Party under Nigel Farage will do very well in the European elections, and that in our own domestic local elections around the same time in Britain, Theresa May's Conservative Party will get a complete drubbing for not having fulfilled the will of the people with the Brexit vote. So I think that she will be gone by the end of May. And I think the smart money is by the time Donald Trump comes on his state visit to Britain in the first week of June, that the person he may be meeting is Boris Johnson at Number ten Downing Street and not Theresa May. What do you think you know Trump as I have known him. Oh, I've known him well over two decades and I know him very very well, and I describe him as somebody that is pretty fearless, very outspoken. You can't talk him into something if he doesn't, you can persuade him, but you can't say stop tweeting. And he's going to stop tweeting. A lot of people try. It's never going to happen. But his ability during this entire time, which is pretty much ben since day one of his presidency, to compartmentalize this witch hunt, and I agree with his words here, and then also look at the American economy record low unemployment for Hispanic Americans, African Americans, Asian Americans, women in the workplace, youth unemployment, every economic record now being shattered. And on top of it, you know, he's also making progress abroad. Yeah, I mean, my biggest complaint about the anti Trump brigade, and I would include seeing in and this mild employers, you know, because I think they've just gone completely anti Trump. And that's fine, but that's not balanced in partial journalism, which is what's seeing him supposed to be. And my problem with it is they don't give Trump any credit when he does things right, and there are lots of things that Trump does. I mean, it's for the first two years. The amount of stuff he's done is extraordinary. I don't agree with all of it, but I do agree with some of it, and I certainly believe that any fair minded person should give Trump credit when he gets things right. I think he's spot on about the NATO bills America has to pay, for example, which are not being paid by the member countries as they should have done. I think he's spot on about the trade war with China, which has been long overdue. I think under Obama, China really seized control of the American economy. And when he weighs, I like the fact that Donald Trump is fighting back on behalf of America for that. I think he's right that the Iranian deal sucked. Everybody knew it sucked. So I think that Trump books are these things all as a business guy, and he goes does this make sense from a business point of view for America Incorporated? Does this make sense? And if his gut tells him it doesn't, he goes on the rampage to try and change it. Now, it's not pretty sometimes, you know, he spews out what he's thinking in real time. I've got to say, I love the fact the President of the United States tells us his thoughts and feelings in real time on Twitter and so on. It's very new it's very refreshing. Sometimes it makes my eyes water, and sometimes I wish he wouldn't be so petty with people and so on. But that's all part of what you get with Donald Trump, and the bottom line is it's what got him elected. It turned out the American people were sick and tired of conventional politicians talking in a very robotic, preprogrammed way that didn't relate to them at all. Politicians who never went down and actually saw how they were struggling in their own lives, how globalization had really hit a toll I think on many people in Middle America, with jobs sourcing out of America and all the rest of it. Donald Trump went down their time and again to the ever bigger rallies, and he spoke to them and said, I know what you're going through. I care about it. I'm going to fix it. And that's why he won, and that's why I believe that Donald Trump is heading for reelection. I think the more the Democrats right now scream impeachment, the stronger Donald Trump's chances of winning again get. I think you analyze him dead aren't accurate. It's funny because I think a lot of people actually fame, this outrage. He was elected to be a disruptor. He's an iconoclastic figure. He keeps his promises, which is refreshing because most politicians say this on election day and they have no intention of ever fulfilling what the promises. On the other end of that, on the other side of this break, we have with us Piers Morgan, who is the editor in chief of The Daily Mail. I want to ask you about the rise of anti Semitism and the impact that's having on Europe now in America, church bombings, and what America might learn on the issue of immigration from Europe. Let me ask you about the rise of these church bombings throughout Europe and the rise of anti Semitism throughout Europe. Big controversy a while back. Are there no go zones in Europe in certain countries. I wouldn't go as far as to say absolute no go zones, but certainly what has been happening in the rise of anti Semitism is disgusting and terrifying. We've seen in Britain, We've seen in other European countries. I also think there's a huge problem remaining with immigration and migration through Europe. Everybody knows this. Everyone's terrified of talking about it. You know, Trump gets hammered all the time for directly addressing the issues on the southern border here in America, but in Britain and other European countries, people are very hesitant to have this debate in case they get immediately labeled racist, which is what happens. And yet the bottom line is we've had the biggest migration of people across the continent of Europe since the end of World War Two, and to pretend this hasn't been happening is to put your head in the sand and ignore a real and present problem. And you know, I don't call it necessarily a danger. I'm not saying all these people are dangerous. I think many people are genuine asylum seekers, genuine refugee. Aren't there are people that have nefarious intentions? Aren't they sneaking? I think there are also people with criminal intent I think there are also people, many people who want a better life and are economic migrants. So I think there's a whole hotspots of reason why people have been joining this vast amount of migration through Europe. Gotta I gotta run, though, But listen, we love having you on. It was great to see on TV the other night and enjoyed it very much. Please, anytime you're in the States, let us know, or if you have a free time, we'd love to have you back. Well, you gotta read the Daily Mail us the managing editor. Here's Morgan. Thank you, sir, Thanks very Michell. Thank you eight hundred and nine for one. Seawan told for you telephone number. You want to be a part of the program when we come back. Oh what about a town that's not going to enforce law. If I'm hungry and I don't have any money, I can just go into the grocery store and take a couple hundred bucks worth of groceries and I'm not going to get in trouble. That's what it looks like. What do you think of this policy? Well, I think it's very unfortunate. I think it's counterproductive. It actually authorizes lawlessness that it's okay to steel. And I think all you have to do is look at cities that have tried this. You have Seattle, Denver, San Francisco, Baltimore, DC, and they've all the crime has shot through the roof. So I understand what the DA is trying to do. John Cruzoe is a good man. I've known him for twenty years. I think he's just going about it the wrong way. We as police officers, we see crime victims every day. And that mom and pop store, which a lot of times that's the only store some of these communities have. That store is going to go out of business. They're not going to be able to take one thousand and two thousand dollars worth of losses. And my greatest concern is that we have an individual who goes in and steal as a simple theft. The shop owner has had enough, he's tired of being robbed. He goes and tries to stop this individual. So we've taken a theft and turn it into a robbery because the shop owner gets assaulted. Then, even worse than the shot, the other shop owner tries to defend the business and pulls out a gun. In the state of Texas, you can use deadly forest to protect property. And now we've taken a simple theft and turned it into a homicide because we didn't do the right thing in the very beginning. And that's arrest people when they steal. All right, big problem happening in Dallas eight hundred nine for one, show them. We'll get to your calls here in a couple of minutes to bring up to speed on a situation down there. Because now you have police officers and their associations across the state North Texas. They're all upset the Dallas DA John cruzettes criminal justice reform policies, and the local agencies are not now are now calling for the removal, but not for removal, but asking him to meet with police agency leaders. So rank and file officers are not getting mixed signals. This so called reform means that the office is basically saying they're not going to prosecute theft of necessary items under seven hundred and fifty bucks, which basically is licensed to go into any grocery store, any food establishment, steal food and say l see later, They're not going to prosecute me, which I think is a little bit nuts and sends the wrong message in a major way. Joining us Michael Madam and he is the Dallas Police Association president, and is that really what the they're saying, that's what they're telling people. Yeah, and that's that's exactly what the new policy says. You know, it's a it's a it's unfortunate that he went public with a policy to you know, to authorize what it sounds like, it's authorized and legalized stealing are the people's property? Well, I mean that to me is unbelievable. How do you get the right to say, all right, so you can go into a grocery store under you know all of this, you know, on these conditions and basically walk out and not get stopped. Can they at least stop you and take the stuff back? Or is that going to be viewed as assault by the people that do it? Well? No, I mean I think we as we as officers of the City of Dallas, we are still going to do our job. Um, we're gonna take that offense and we're gonna file that case. The problem is that the DA's not gonna not gonna prosecute it, so you know, it's almost a waste of our time. But like I said, we're going to do our job. But what do you tell that shop owner when the shop owner knows nothing's going to come out of this. So you know what it's gonna do. It's gonna drive that that small, uh mom and pomp store that a lot of these communities. Those are the only stores that they have, and it's going to drive them out of business. So it's like we have, you know, mom and pop shops are totally screwed over in this. Who's gonna ever want to be in business? You're right, And more importantly, this is dangerous because you come into my store and you're gonna steal my stuff, Um, excuse me, I'm gonna try and stop it, and then you're not going to get any backing by the local prosecutors and somehow they're gonna flip it that you're at fault. Yeah, and that that is my concern too. You know, these these stores are the basis of some of those communities. They've been there for ten, fifteen, twenty years. And allowing any individual to go in there and steal property up to seven hundred and fifty dollars, you know, poor people are not going to go in there and steal. Poor people do not steal. And that message that's being sent through this policy that they you know, they regress to stealing when they need something is just incorrect and wrong. The you know, the individuals that live in this community are some of the most more world and law abiding individuals we have in Dallas County. But this but the criminal, the criminal element who they make a living off stealing, will have a field day with this. Yep, No, how could you not? All right, we're gonna watch this. I really feel bad for the you and you're the guys that work. They're gonna risk their lives arrest somebody. They're not going to be prosecuted or I guess they won't even arrest them anymore, and they'll have to you know, break up fights. When the owners that maybe don't make a lot of money every year, they're just you know, making a living, uh, you know, giving free stuff to people. Nobody will will support them. What's the point anyway? Thank you. Mike remembers the state of Texas. State of Texas, an individual can use deadly force and protect their property. And it's a shame that we might turn a simple theft into a homicide for something that should have never taken place. Unbelievable. All right, thank you, Mike. Let's get to our busy But I mean, can you imagine you're a No, you can't you imagine you're a store owner. And that's anybody's free to walk in and take whatever they want as long as it's there's seven hundred and fifty bucks. Well, the second one thing, I'm starting to get real irritated with people not having personal accountability, and I'm getting real irritated with people getting away with crap, and I'm getting real irritated that we're not supporting our police officers. You know, you see this story today about this woman who murdered her son, five year old kid. She murdered him. You know what, she doesn't belong in a prison. She doesn't belong in jail. She doesn't deserve to eat on my tax dollar. No, you know what she deserves. She deserves death, death immediately, the same way she killed her son. It's how we should kill her. You have a good morning this morning. Would you like some black rifle coffee? Oh listen, I know I'm agreeing with you. It's terrible we're not protecting the innocent. You know that goes to the whole border issue. I mean, to me, what's so incredible to me is that we have all the statistics. We know where the drugs are coming from, we know who's bringing him in. We have the cartels, we have the gang members, we have the four thousand homicides plus in two years, the thirty thousand, the thirty thousand sexual assaults, one hundred thousand violent assaults. When do we air about helping the people here? First of all, people share set it. This is twice in two weeks. Share agrees with Sean Hannity. She must be watching my TV show and somehow she's beginning to realize that letting crazy people the Sarnoff brothers and others vote is not smart. Pedophiles and murderers vote. And then on top of that, we're gonna let crime occur and not save a mom and pop store. That's that's unright. So you you open a store, you put your savings out, you finally get it together, you get a lease, you stock it with supplies, you have a grand opening. Everything you own is on the line. Forget about it. And you know what's you know what's really sad is that what we're basically saying to your average law abiding, good person is we're not going to reward you for the good behavior you do. We're gonna reward those who are breaking the law because it's not that big of a crime. They think of this. You walk into any restaurant, you order a meal under seven hundred and fifty bucks. Guess what relief you'll leave. They're not going to be able to stop it. Delicious than now, see Elata, Thanks for thanks. What about the three year old last night? You hear about that three year old boy used to get across the border. Left just left in the middle of a field in Texas. I use it, three year old, three year old child, little boy. It's you know. I'm telling you we're living We're living two alternate realities now in this country. You I think the right to vote is inherent to our democracy. Yes, even for terrible people. But I do believe that even if they are in jail, they're paying their price to society. But that should not take away their inherent American right to participate in our democracy. I am a strong supporter of the Green New Deal. Now we cannot wait any longer. We have got to make change. That's how I hear this. There are people in Washington, DC, supposed leaders who have failed to have the courage to reject a false choice which suggest you're either in favor of the Second an Amendment or you want to take everyone's guns away. Supposed leaders in Washington, DC who have failed to have the courage to recognize you know what, you want to go hunting, that's fine, but we need reasonable guns safety laws in this country, starting with universal background checks and a renewal of the assault weapon ban. Upon being elected, I will give the United States Congress one hundred days to get their act together and have the courage to pass reasonable gun safety laws. And if they fail to do it, then I will take executive action. You know, would you, if you could, would you take the wall down now here? Yes, like you have a wall, absolute, knock it down. Take the wall. Do you think the city? You think if there's a referendum here in the city that would pass. I do got the green New Dealers, the impeached Trumpers, the insanity of their left, the open borders, and then the rest of us that work hard, played by the rules, pay taxes. Yes, we pay them, whether you like it or not. You get your kids, You raise your kids, you and still values in your kids. You wake them up, get them dressed, make their lunch, send them off to school. Work your fourteen hour day, come home exhausted, maybe on some public transportation, and then the next part of your day is, oh, maybe spending ten fifteen minutes with your kids, putting in a sleep, getting a beer and watching five seconds of TV as long as it's Hannity is it's okay, and going to bed. And the sad part is if they will go to school in New York, they get to go under build the Blasio's watch have meatless Monday and wonder where nine hundred million dollars went because his wife can't seem to find it apparently. All right, let's get to our phones. All right, let's say hi to Ryan and Virginia. What's up, Ryan? How are you? Hey? Hey, mister Hannay, here's a Greek play. Is anybody in Virginia dealing with your lieutenant governor that's been accused of rape and violent sexual assault? I don't believe so, because he is a Democrat and Democrats can do whatever they want and get away with it. Unbelievable. Not nobody's talking. Nobody's even talking about it anymore, No nor the governor, nor any of it. It's just it's been swept under the rug. Ignore it. And oh, Trump Trump, Trump Trump. So there you go. Ye, unbelievable anyway, that that that's the country ahead, Sean, I am a veteran, I am a conservative, I am a Republican, and I am a convicted felon. I was sentenced to forty months in federal prison. I have been released. I am back in my community. I am working very very hard to make up for what I did and to rebuild my life. What I did was horrible and I'm screwed up. But I vehemently disagree with Bernie Sanders wanting to allow people that are actively in prison to vote, because you're being punished. You while you're in prison, you are being punished. So let me ask you how many how many years did you spend in the prison? I was? I actually spent twenty nine months behind bars and then four months and a half way house. Okay, what was the crime? I don't know what that was. What was the crime? That's that's that's my radio. Because I'm at work. I'd rather not say, Sean, Okay, I'm probably drug related. If I had to guess, are you different? How long ago since you've been let out? I got out in June of last year of prison. I was led out at the halfway house in October. I have twenty years of probation and according to Virginia law, I cannot apply to get my rights to vote back until after I've served my probation. My gun rights are all the same way. I don't care about my gun rights. That's that's a whole other subject. But the fact is I'm a I'm present in my community. I am as active in my community as I can be. So I should be able to vote for my councilman, my mayor, my governor who I disagree with, my congress person, who I also disagree with because it's now Elaine Lauria and not Scott Taylor m my senators, both of whom I dmtled to disagree with. As I said, I'm a Republican. That said, Sean, the only reason that somebody should lose their right to vote permanently is if they have committed voter fraud or conspiracy to commit voter fraud. Other than that, we are if you're if you've been released, are part of the community now. You need to have a chance to rebuild your life. Felons are business owners. There. There's a lot of a lot of felons that you've never even realized are in your community, and they are just as affected by the rules regulations and laws that are proposed and passed by the legislatures in their localities, in their states, and in the federal government system. So why shouldn't we've allowed about if we've not, if we're making a compelling case. Look, I recently spoke to a bunch of prisoners at Rikers Island. Well it's a while back, and I've never been asked back again. I use some pretty sastly language in that. I kind of sounded like Linda for a little bit, but I just laid it out straight. There was a guy. Must have been a great speech. Yeah, And by the way, Ryan, just don't go back to jail. Whatever you did, I hope you changed forever, and I hope you'll learned a lesson, and I wish you the best in your life. I do have a disagreement, but you make a very strong compelling case for yourself, which which I appreciate, and you remember the result of that. I go in there, there's a guy that is won't shut up speaking before me. They're like, oh, they can't take it anymore. Guy would not shut up. So I finally I'm like, I'm dying. They're visibly saying when he got done, They clapped him. Finally you stopped. So the first thing I said is all right, I know you guys have been sitting in a while. I asked the crowd their families, because they had finished this program. Can I just address them? They said, yeah, I'm only gonna speak five minutes. You don't want to be luxured too. And I said, half of you are coming back, half for you. Do you miss McDonald's pizza, fresh air, working girlfriends, building a life, your kids in some cases, because if you do, don't come back here click done. So yeah, good luck, God bless you all. That's it. Make it, make good choices. And I said, if you have to move away from your crazy family and friends, do it. All right. That's gonna wrap things up for today. Hannity. Tonight at nine, the President fights back. By the way, whatever happened to law in order in this country? And by the way, Lindsay Graham four specific areas his committee will be investigating. They'll be investigating the investigation into Hillary Clinton. Also, we will get into also he will get into the FISA warrant issue and all the surrounding details. Why was this a counter intelligence operation anyway? And the issue surrounding General Flynn. Finally, somebody stands up for the thirty three year vet at Both Tomey and McCabe bragg about having set up and abused power. Anyway, It's all coming up tonight at nine Hannity, Fox News. Thanks for being with us, See you tonight. Back here tomorrow