Let not your heart be troubled. You are listening to the Shawan Hannity Radio show podcast. All right, so I have insomnia, but I've never slept better. And what's changed just a pillow. It's had such a positive impact on my life. And of course I'm talking about my pillow. I fall asleep faster, I stay asleep longer. And now you can to just go to my pillow dot com or call eight hundred zero nine zero use the promo code Hannity, and Mike Lindell, the inventor of My Pillow, has the special four pack. Now you get off to my Pillow premiums and to go Anywhere pillows. My pillows made here in the USA has a sixty day unconditional money back guarrantee and a ten you warranty. Go to my pillow dot com right now or call eight zero nine zero promo code Hannity to get Mike Lindell's special four pack offer. You get to my Pillow Premium pillows and to Go Anywhere pillows for forty percent off. And that means once those pillows arrive, you start getting the kind of peace full and RESTful and comfortable and deep peeling and recuperative sleep that you've been evning and you certainly deserve. Mike pillow dot Com promo called Hannity you will love this Pillow heard in passing with the Russian ambassador during that reception. I do not remember it. After the speech, I was interviewed by the news media. There was an area for that U in a different room, and then I left the hotel. But whether I ever attended a reception where or where the Russian ambassador was also present, is entirely beside the point of this investigation into Russian interference in the sixteen campaign. Let me state this clearly, colleagues, I have never met with or had any conversation with any Russians or any foreign officials concerning any type of interference with any campaign or election in the United States. Further, I have no knowledge of any such conversations by anyone connected to the Trump campaign. I was your colleague and this body for twenty years at least some of you and I participate. UH And the suggestion that I participated in any collusion, that I was aware of any collusion with the Russian government to hurt this country, which I have served with honor for thirty five years or to undermine the integrity of our democratic process. Isn't an appalling and detestable life. Relatedly, there is the assertion that I that I did not answer Senator Franklin's question honestly at my confirmation hearing colleagues, that is false. Senator Sessions just taking to the his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee a combative and outraged It is an appalling, detestable lie. I have served my country for thirty five years with honor and distinction, which goes right to the heart of the new narrative that doesn't exist, the big lie, the black helicopter conspiracy theory, the tinfoil at news media destroyed Trump News media conspiracy out there Trump Russia collusion, which we learned last Thursday, doesn't exist. And there are so many different things. All right, hang on one side, what are you telling me, Linda? While are you talking? We can continue to carry these I'm aware I got a lot to say here. All right, We're gonna get to that in a second. You know, he said, these false attacks will not intimidate me. Events have only strengthened my resolve. I'm I'm literally watching this. Let's let's dip in and then we'll get right back to this analysis in a second. I will not allow this great department to be deterred from its vital mission. Thank you, Mr Chairman, ranking Remember Warner. I have a great honor to appear before you to day, and I will do my best to answer your questions. Thank you for that testimony. I'd like to note for members, the chair and the Vice chairman will be recognized for ten minutes. Members will be recognized for five minutes. Uh. And I'd like to remind our members that we are in open session. No references to classify it or committee sensitive materials should be used relative to your questions. With that, I recognized myself at this time for ten minutes. John Sessions, Um, you talked about the Mayflower Hotel where the President gave his first foreign policy speech, and it's been covered in the press that the President was there, You were there, others were there? Uh? From your testimony, you said you don't remember whether Ambassador kiss Leak was there, the Russian ambassador. Is that correct? Um? I did not remember that, UM, but I understand he was there. Uh. And UM, so I don't doubt that he was. I believe that representations are correct. In fact, I recently saw a video of him coming into the room. But you never remember having a conversation or meeting with the master kiss. I do not, And there was in that event. Was there ever a private room setting that uh that you were involved in, no other than the reception area that was shut off from UH? This really closely. I think I can I can help you more if I bring you up to speed on everything that's happening here. UM, it's always a tough decision to make programming wise, do you run with the tape? Do you run with the testimony? It's very slow moving. A lot of you don't have the background. Let me give you some background that I think will will help context and texture to all of this and enhance your understanding of what is actually going on today. So the Attorney General did this voluntarily. He agreed to meet with the Senate Intelligence Committee. This is an open setting, and I think there's a certain sign here on their part. Yeah, we're willing to investigate. You just heard his opening statement, thirty five year public servant. I find it appalling and detestable the lie of that I would ever collude or somehow working in conjunction with a foreign entity to influence the election process in this country. And he was pissed. And I've known him for many years. That is not his usual demeanor. That is somebody that has really ticked off. And also he asked that the hearing be open. He asked for that in full public view. What you're now listening to, what we're dipping in and out of here. And if you look at his life and his background, he has been you know, all the things that are being alleged here. When he was the U. S. Senator. It is his job to meet with ambassadors and foreign leaders and foreign dignitaries. That's what all members of Congress do. In the case of this ambassador from Russia that they're talking about, oh, let's see Pelosi and Schumer and and uh, you know Jack Read and Cantwell and my Casque, all of them met with this particular guy. So it would make it if that scandalous. So are the efforts of these other senators who were also doing their job. And you know, one of the meetings was quote international outreach at the Obama State Department. Eight diplomats during the Republican National Convention. They organized it, and they're making something into this that it's never been. As we learned last week, no collusion, none whatsoever as it relates to Donald Trump and the Trump campaign. Nothing, zero, zip, not. And the lie continues. It just goes on and on. And that's what's so outrageous about this. Now, if you look at everything that we have learned from James Comey, you know, confirmed multiple times that not only did the Trump White House, the President himself, his staff, all of them did not ask to stop the Russian investigation. The President encouraged it. He wanted it to continue. He said, if there's any satellites around me, I'd like to know. I think it's important for people to know. And he's done nothing wrong, no evidence of collusion. But yet this narrative continues this, you know, and it gets worse because you got this investigation, You got that investigation. When do you hear the information I've got on Robert Mueller today? Who should recuse himself? You know? Is that Director Comey in all of this testimony, you know, all of this talk was never even investigating the president, and Director Comy he admitted, well, what he's a leaker. He went out there because he wanted a special counsel, ends up being one of his best friends, one of his mentors. And why do you see the people that that Mueller of Mueller is surrounding himself with and have come me so concerned about conversations of President Trump, And he's shocked and and maybe if I was a little stronger and I was nauseous and everything, and I didn't know what to do, and well, he had an obligation and duty to stand up, walk out and report it as a matter of law eighteen US Code. For now, I'm going to tell you something here. You know, we've seen this side show before, and that is I I was retweeting Alan Dershowitz today. Is there any any liberal that is willing to put aside their obsessive, compulsive hatred of the president and objectively discerned civil liberties, the rule of law, the constitution of the United States, Because, as Dirt dirsh Wits have been saying and a few others, there's no possibility of obstruction of justice here, zero evidence of collusion. Show it to me. I'll look at it as I've been saying now for a long long time. You know, one of the big stories that we were breaking later in the programming. By the way, assessings did say that he did not meet with the Ushan ambassador at the Mayflower Hotel, you know, but they cannot from there vantage points stop this obsession. And now you've got Robert Mueller involved in this because why because James Comey wanted it. James Comey, a disgruntled fired x FBI director who clearly had an agenda. When I tell you what Sarah Carter broke today, it will blow your mind. And nobody else seems to be willing to report what is real obstruction of justice that she and John Solomon have discovered. But you got now, oh what did we discover? Was on Breitbart earlier today. You know that in fact, Robert Mueller, who's you know, was appointed by the deputy Attorney General, Robert Rosenstein, who took independent control after the recusal of of the Attorney general in this particular case Sessions anyway, that you know, and Sessions leaking the document anyway. So now we've got a more controversial pick of Mueller's working the team a former prosecutor at Wilmer Hale, a partner, Jennie Ray, and in according to Politico, she performed work for the Clinton Foundation defending it from Freedom of Information Act requests related to Hillary Clinton's private email server. How in in how did this possibly happen? You want a fair, balanced objective, you know, investigation, and you hire a Clinton Foundation lawyer for the Russia probe and that's tolerable to people. That is insane in terms of a conflict of interest, and former Speaker of the House, this is now a witch hunt. Officially, it is a witch hunt. Now there's work. It gets worse than that. Now we find Life that had this today a great piece, you know, talking about Speaker ging Rich's comment and a tweet challenging the fairness of this investigation, and you know, pointing out and he'll join us later in the program, the early hires of of Robert Mueller. You know, Republicans quote he said, are delusional if they think the Special Council is going to be fair. He's right. You think back to Patrick Fitzgerald, when Patrick Fitzgerald started his job. Valerie Plaine leak. Valerie Plaine. Okay, he knew on day one who the leaker was. We didn't find out till later. The investigation should have been shut down then and there goes on what two three years, and at the end of the day, they go so far outside the realm of what it is that they were originally supposed to be investigating. Because he knew the answer, So he has to justify these existence and the existence of all the office people that they put in place. And he's a guide by reputation that doesn't sleep in the middle of a case. So he'd be damned if he doesn't get something at the end of the day. So we call it investigation creep, where you start at one place and you go a hundred of different directions in the other, in the other way, and what did he get? A perjury trapped for Scooter Libby. It's ridiculous at this point, it's the same thing. We already know no obstruction of justice, we know no collusion. And then the question is why are we still doing all of this? And why is he hiring not only a Clinton Foundation lawyer for the Russia probe, now he's stocking his staff with Democratic donors to Hillary and Obama. You've got four lawyers hired by Mueller have contributed tens of thousands of dollars over the years to the Democratic Party. Democratic candidates, including Obama, including Clinton. It's it takes my breath away. Why would why would you put partisans on all of this? This is beyond disturbing. This is now. I've talked about five enemies. The president has, the deep state, the Democrats they wanted to impeach him from day one, that can't take the election loss. Then you got the destroy Trump media. Then you've got weak Republicans that won't ever stand up for anything. And then you've got the never trumpers that that want to desperately have their images your abilitated and and become relevant again. Wait till I explain what the the interaction between Loretta Lynch and James Comey that was discussed in close session last week as broken by John Solomon and Sarah Carter. That's coming up next, and we'll be following the Attorney General's testimony. Hey, with optimism once again on the rise in America. The working people of this country are more important than ever. Well, now they have a podcast that celebrates them and tells their stories on the job from Hired to Retired. Also new podcasts from our friends that express employment professionals that digs into the lives of men and women at work and explores their journeys as they fight to make the American dream of reality. On the Job takes the listener through the ups and downs of making a living in America. Now check out the new podcast On the Job from Hired to Retired on I Heart Radio, iTunes, or wherever you download your favorite podcasts, or just go to Express pros dot com slash podcast for more information. All right, let's tip in Attorney General Sessions now before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Let's step in with Democrat Mark Warner before I was confirmed and before he was confirmed. It's something that we both agreed to that a fresh start at the FBI was probably the best thing. Just again, seems a little I could understand that if you talked about that before you came on, you had a chance for fresh start. There was no fresh start. Suddenly we're in the midst of the investigation, and with timing that seems a little peculiar that what kind of, at least to me, was out of the blue. The President fires the FBI director, and if there are all these problems of disarray and a lack of of sweet chord at the FBI, all things that the acting director of the FBI denied is the case. I would have thought that somebody would have had that kind of conversation with Director Tommy was at leastman O that let's go to the may or. The April meeting has been brought up. I think the chairman brought it up. By the time April came around, you'd already been named as the chair of of then candidate Trump's National Security Advisory so showing up that meeting would be appropriate not only Hotel. Yes, yes, sir, And you know I'm understanding was that the President son A. Law Gerald and Jared Kushner was at that was at that meeting as well. I believe he was. Yes, you don't recollect whether m. Kushner had any conversations with ambassad kiss Leak at that session. I do not, And to the best of your memory, you had no conversation with the ambassad kiss Leak at that meeting. I don't recall it. Senator maura Um, it would have been certainly, I can assure you nothing improperly if I'd had a conversation with him, and it's conceivable at that occurred. I just don't remember it. But there was nothing in your notes or memories so that when you had a chance, and you did, and I appreciate correct the record about the other two sessions. In response to Senator Frank and Santar Lady, this one didn't pop into your memory that maybe in the over abundance account of caution that you have to report that this session as well. Well, I guess I could say that I possibly had a meeting, but I still do not recall it. And uh, let me let me these hearings get so monotonous. When we come back, we'll give you some of the big highlights that have so far happened, will update you. We've got a lot coming up today. Former Speaker of the House, New Gingrich, we have the biggest blockbuster story about well, an incident between Loretta Lynch and the FBI Director Comy that raises tremendous questions about obstruction of justice, legality, and collusion. Straight ahead, all right, this is Senator Rish now with Jeff Sessions, the Attorney General. Le'll just dip in a little more. Although it's fairly monotonous, to be honest, conversations with the UH officers of other governments or ambassadors or what have you are everyday occurrences here, multiple time occurrences for most of us. Is that a fair statement? I think it is, yes. And indeed, if you run into one in a grocery store, you're gonna have a conversation with them. Is that fair? Could very well happen and nothing improper. On the other hand, Uh, collusion of collusion with the Russians or any other government for that matter, when it comes to our elections certainly would be improper and illegal. Would that be a fair statement? Absolutely? All right? Are you willing to sit here and tell the American people, unfiltered by what the media is going to put out, that you participated in no conversations of any kind where there was collusion between the Trump campaign and any other foreign I can say that absolutely, and Uh, I have no hesitation to do so. Mr Sessions, your former U S Attorney for me, the United States senator, the Attorney General the United States. You participated, as you've described, in the Trump campaign, and UH ask such a you traveled with the campaign? I g I did you spoke for the campaign at the one or a number of occasions? I was not continually? Uh? And on the based upon upon your experience and based upon your participation in campaign. Did you hear even a whisper or a suggestion or anyone making reference within that campaign that somehow the Russians were involved in that. I did not. Would you have done if you'd have heard that, well, I would have been shocked and I would have known it was improper and headed for the exit. I suppose maybe. Uh so this was, uh, you know serious. This is a serious matter, because what you're talking about it hacking into a private person or d n C computer and obtaining information and spreading that out. That's just not what's amazing about all this because he's saying it, by the way, Linda, the same person as your answer. Uh, what's so amazing about this is he answers the question and then come back and ask it fifty different ways. And it's an easy question to answer because they don't have much to go on here, and even even the president, as we learned from COMA, was never under investigation. There's no evidence of collusion. I don't even have time today to play the longer and longer and longer montage of everybody Democrats included all saying no evidence of collusion, and we had evidence. I talk about it but it doesn't exist, and it just goes on and on, this monotonous dog and pony show that is, you know out there. Let's let's dip into I Am Fine style a little. Essentially told them that he learned on May eighth that President Trump intended to remove Director Comy. When you wrote your letter on May nine, did you know that the President had already decided to fire Director Comy, uh, Senator Einstein. I would say that, I believe it's been made public that on the President asked us our opinion, it was given, and he asked us to put that in writing. Uh and Uh. I don't know how much more he said about it than that, but I believe he has talked about it, and I would let his words speak for themselves. Well. On May eleven, on NBC Nightly News. Two days later, the President stated he was going to fire call me regardless of the recommendation. So I'm puzzled about the recommendation because, um, the decision had been made. So what was the need for you to write a recommendation. Well, we were asked our opinion, uh, and when we expressed it, which was consistent with the memorandum and the latter we wrote after comfortable, and and I guess the Deputy Attorney General did too, and in providing that information in writing. So the President asked me, all right, with this schets monotonous. So the President asked me to do something and to give a recommendation and tell me what the recommendation should be. But I gave him a recommendation as he asked. Was getting really asked? And all right, Just to sum up what's happened so far, it's pretty obviously. Look the the any suggestion he says that I was aware of collusion against the United States, I find appalling and I find the testable. He recused himself from the Russian probe over d o J stipulation on campaign involvement. He never intended to not disclose meetings with the Russian ambassador. And as a matter of fact, he said he was not silence silent when Comey expressed concern, contradicting the former FBI Drove director in other words, um, he went on to say, and in great detail, excuse me, I was in the room, and I gave a long answer. When, of course we're going to do everything properly, he said, of course we will, he said, he did not have interactions with Mullerson's his appointment. Oh, I guess he didn't. I guess he didn't collude the way Comey did before his testimony. Or let's just say, maybe collusions are wrong word. Maybe we're using that word a little too much in the American vernacular at this time. It's it's an overused word. Maybe we'll say advice from the special counsel. He said he hadn't had any interactions with him were accusal was due to d o J rules, not because of wrongdoing. So he's trying to be as ethnically sound as he can. He said, there's nothing wrong with the president talking to an FBI director. He said there's a longstanding d o J policy to not disclose conversations as Attorney General that he has at the White House. He said, I'm not claiming executive privilege. That is the president's power. He said, I did not have conversations with Comey about the FBI leadership performance. He says he couldn't recall any conversations that he or Jared Kushner had with the Russian ambassador in April, of which is the one I told you about earlier. FBI by the way we've learned, is now in possession of the the Comy memos, which were always government property, that ended up being leaked two The New York Times by his friend. You see what's going on here? Do you understand what this is about? Now? We've got Robert Mueller, the Special Council is out there, and one of the attorneys he's hires is a Clinton Foundation lawyer. Do you know how breathtaking that is? Why would you not see an obvious conflict of interest here? You know, William Hale partner Genie ray or Red, according to Politico, performed work for the Clinton Foundation defending it from Freedom of Information Act request related to Hillary's private email server. Is that not a red flag to anybody? Is that not evidence of a witch hunt that is emerging here? Is this not? Patrick Fitzgerald mission, creep, investigative, creep reducs Alan Dershowitz. This is dangerous to civil liberty. Show me the man and I'll find you the crime. Said, some Democrats are out doing each other searching for criminal statutes that can be stretched to fit what they would like to see as crimes by President Trump. That is exactly what we're living in here. It is the five enemies that I have talked about. It is the deep state, It is the Democratic Party that never got over Trump's win. It is the destroy Trump media. It is weak, spineless Republicans that can't even stand up to what is a witch hunt here. And then of course the never Trumpers. They just want relevancy and they want to say, see, we were right, that's where we are. And meanwhile, Americans still exist in poverty, Americans are still suffering. Americans you know, are on food stamps, Americans you know, are out of the labor force. It's unbelievable, unbelievable. You know, I'm gonna tell you something. Somebody's lying here. And my viewing of this is it seems to be comey and the angry, disgruntled employee was comey. Now here's where I know. And this is what we're gonna get into in our final hour of the program. You don't want to miss Sarah Carter today. So, Sarah Carter, John Solomon, I think have the biggest blockbuster story that you're not gonna hear about from the mainstream media because they're so corrupt and and this is important. In his testimony, Colly said Uh, well, you know nothing. You know, Sessions, you know he never said to not leave the room and leave him alone with the president. And he told the committee, the Senate Intel Committee, that you know, he didn't say a word back. Session just testified two seconds ago that he answered come with a long answer, agreeing that everything should always be done properly. So Comey's lying or Sessions is lying, and I'm betting it's Comey. Look at this whole thing now where he wanted a special counsel and he got it and it turns out to be his best friend. All right, Now, let's take another look at comy. We know Hillary Clinton committed multiple felonies. You know, the legal standard is is very clear gross negligence. He used the words extreme carelessness. There's no difference mom and pop shop bathroom. You know, an email server, top secret classified Special Access program information on it. That is the mismanager. That is gross negligence of intelligence. That is a felony destroying top secret classified special Access program information. These are felonies committed by Hillary Clinton. Now we already know about the inappropriate contact as it relates to Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch. Now listen to this. Now, the FBI director or x fired, disgruntled, angry j Edgar Comy privately told members of Congress that he had a frosty exchange with Obama's Attorney General Loretta Lynch last year when he confronted her about possible political interference in the Hillary Clinton email investigation. Now, pay attention, Larette. What he was told is Laretta Lynch put the kobosh on any indictment for Hillary Clinton. So pay attention. This is important. And during his testimony last Thursday before the Senate Intel Committee, Comey alludes to the exchange between him and Lynch after publicly discussing an encounter with Lynch where she ordered him to refer to the criminal probe of Clinton and the handling of classified emails is well, don't say it's an investigation, just call it a matter, which was right along the talking points of the Clinton campaign, and even suggested it smacked a political spin rather than the professional way that law enforcement officers talk. Now, if he's so concerned about obstruction, pay close attention here. That concerned me, Comey said, because that language tracked the way the campaign was talking about the FBI's work. And that's concerning. Well, it's more than concerning Mr Comey, And then Comey said the conversation occurred well before the email probe was shut down and shortly before both Comey and Lynch were expected to testify and congress about and possibly feel questions about the candidates email they she wanted him on the same page before that testimony, he said her request gave him a queasy feeling. Now Democratic Senator Feinstein said, I would have a queasy feeling too, though, to be candid with you, you know, I think we need to know more and that's the only way to know about this is to have the Judiciary Committee take a look. God bless fine Stone. She's saying, really that sounds like obstruction without her saying it. And a multiple private conversations and private sessions over the last few months, Comey has told lawmakers about a second later confrontation with Attorney General Lynch shortly before the email probe was shut down by him, and he told lawmakers and closed door sessions that he raised his concern and by the way this happened in the close session last week, I'm told that he raised concerns with the Attorney General that she had created a conflict of interest by meeting Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac while investigating wrongdoing of his wife. And let's get this. During the conversation, call Me tells lawmakers he can front and Lynch with a highly sensitive piece of evidence, a communication between two political figures that suggested, get this, Lynch had agreed to put the kabash on any prosecution of Clinton. That, ladies and gentlemen, is called a smoking gun. That is obstruction of justice. And by the way, we're not even talking about the Russian connection with uranium one that she signed off on having money funneled back millions to the Clinton Foundation, Comey said. The Attorney General looked at the document again, communication between two political figures suggesting Lynch stuff that we have this in the bag. This is what it said, that Lynch had already said she put the kabash on any prosecution. The fix was in no wonder she wasn't indicted, and then called me said. The Attorney General looked at the document, looked up with a quote steely silence that lasted quote for some time, and then asked him do you have any other business with her? If not, he should leave her office. Comy then took the interaction and the fact that is astruction. She needs to be prosecuted as well as Hillary Clinton. They're doing all the wrong investigations here, they're interviewing all the wrong people, and they've got this ask backwards the whole thing. If you care about truth, justice, the constitution, equal application of the law between the Clintons and then the rest of America, this is a this is a disgrace. What's gone on here a national disgrace. Al Right, top story today when we got two of them. We've got, of course, the Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his testimony that's going ongoing now. We're dipping in and out at the Senate Intelligence Committee. And our other top story is, oh my goodness, it looks like Attorney General Lynch under Obama, Apparently James Comey confronted her with a piece of evidence, a communication between political figures that suggested Lynch had put the cabosh on any indictment or prosecution of Hillary Clinton. Sarah Carter, who broke that story, will join us. New king Ridge will join us next. We'll get his take on all that's happening. We'll also get your calls in here, and we'll be dipping in and out of this this hearing throughout the day. Quick break right back will continue. I recuse myself from any investigation into the campaign for president, but I did not recuse myself from defending my honor against schirless and false allegations at all times throughout the course of the campaign, the confirmation process, and since becoming Attorney General, I have dedicated myself to the highest standards. Question is Mr Comey said that there were matters with respect to the recusal that were problematic and he couldn't talk about them. What are they that? Why don't you tell me they are none? Senator Widen, There are none. I can tell you that for absolute certainty, we can you tell. This is a sacred innuendow being leaked out there about me, and I don't appreciate it. Wow, that was the Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, fiery before the Senate Intelligence Committee. And what is really backfiring on the Democrats and they just keep going back to the same questions again and again and again and again. Um joining us now former Speaker of the House, he's got a brand new book out today. And by the way, understanding Trump, he is going to be in Ridgewood, New Jersey tonight at seven pm. And Mr Speaker, we also look forward to having you on TV, which is always fun to have a rare and studio appearance. And uh, congratulations on the book. And we'll get to that in a second. But Ridgewood, New Jersey, of book ends, which is a great place to have a book signing. Um, you said, you know, can you think of one thing Trump can do worse than you know, the whole issue that this is a witch hunt with Robert Mieller. No, Look, I think it's amazing. And by the way, I thought that Jeff Sessions was just magnificent, and the way he stood up pointed out both the difference between recusal over a specific issue and failure to run the FBI, which was his duty, pointed out that his personal integrity was being impugned. And I thought it was a tremendously compelling opening statement by the Attorney General. I was very very proud of him, very compelling. But also his answer that we just played a Ron Wyden was particularly amazing too. And it's like, you know, this is now character assassination. You know, the whole thing here seems to hinge on a very basic fundamental question that we now had answered last week. We know the president wasn't being investigated. We know that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. And I can play all the Democrats saying with no evidence of collusion, which I've done many many times, and then you know, one has to ask itself why are we having the investigation at this point because we already know the answer. According to James Comey, Well, the whole thing is astonishing. You know, it hit me because I've been digging deeply into uh Comey's background and in our experience of Comy in the past, and then how he um manipulated the entire system to get Mueller to be the UH Special Council, and then Mueller hairing four Democratic lawyers, one of whom had worked for the Clinton Foundation, one of whom had a track record of concealing evidence from the defense UH in a way that it is illegal. UM. And it hit me as I dug into all this stuff that the real Remember this is coming in a period where Kathy Griffin is holding up UH an image of Donald Trump's head bleeding. UH. It's coming at a time when a New York public theater is showing the assassination of the prey. By the way. We we found out, by the way, just a little while ago that this assassination theater group did in fact collect millions of dollars in taxpayer grants after days of reports claiming taxpayer dollars weren't used to fund Shakespeare in the Park, which you know, the depiction of President Trump as as Julius Caesar suffering a bloody assassination. Well, and my point is you have to see everything that's going on in the context. I was reminded of Arthur Miller's extraordinary play The Crucible about the Salem Witchcraft trial. Because what you've got now on the left is the equivalent of the Salem Witchcraft Trial. These people know that Trump and and that the Attorney General and that others are guilty. They don't know what they're guilty of. But it's literally the same kind of psychological emotion that Miller portrayed so vividly in his play about the witchcraft trials in Salem back in the seventeen century. And so you get this this wave of weird stuff. Uh. And and it doesn't matter what you say. I mean, for example, Uh, the solid evidence that the Russian ambassador visited the White House twenty two times. Well, he's the Russian ambassador, He's supposed to go visit the White House. But whether or not in a large group meeting, the Russian ambassador in passing actually saw Sessions. And then it's the Remember this whole report by Comy, and I think Comey is a maliciously destructive person. This the whole way Comey framed it was based on what apparently is an intercept of the Russian ambassador sending a message back to Moscow exaggerating his ability to have a conversation with Sessions. There are everybody who was at the reception, who has who has showed up he said no, this is simply totally untrue. And you get this again and again and every time one of them gets knocked down. There to news stories. And I'll be fascinating to see what comes out of today, because I think Jeff Sessions is a very smart and very very honorable person is going to do more than enough to handle his former colleagues. And at that point the Left is gonna have to find a whole new excuse for the hysteria that they're in the middle of You've raised a couple of points. One is that Robert Mueller is stocked his staff with Democratic donors. And I think even more breathtaking than this is that Mueller hired the Clinton foundation lawyer for this particular Russian probe. Now, this particular woman was somebody that her name is Genie Ray, and according to Politico, she performed work for the Clinton Foundation defending it from Freedom of Information Act requests related to hill HER's private email server. Now, if that, if that's not a conflict of interest, I I don't know what is. I really don't look. I mean, I said today on one of the shows as we were launching, I mean, there is no other show by my show. Well, when you're a struggling author, do the best you can to get off the ground. You gotta go where you can do. You know, by the way, the book is phenomenal. If you can stay longer, by the way, tell me again, I'm happy to because I'm thrilled by understanding Trump. But I said to I said to one of the audiences one of the earlier days. You know, if if if MOA wants to prove that we should genuinely respect his neutrality, what if he established a rule he has to hire one pro Trump lawyer for every pro Clinton lawyer. I can't believe that nobody besides me seems to have picked up on this. You know, you know Sarah Carter from circanoose Sarah Carter. This is probably the most unbelievable story describes the situation of a confrontation beyond Bill Clinton on the tarmac with with Loretta Lynch. Apparently that the FBI director call me, got information from two politicos that actually suggested that Loretta Lynch had already put the kabash on any possibility of any Clinton indictment, that she was in the tank for Hillary. He confronts her, She says nothing, but looks at him with steely silence. According to the testimony that apparently took place in closed session, and is that not obstruction of justice? Does that not warrant an investigation in of it of itself? Well, by the way, to her credit, Senator Feinstein, the senior Democrat and the Intelligence Committee, has said publicly that she believes clearly that Attorney General Lynch has to be investigated and that this whole thing really is so bad that she wants to see something done to dig much deeper. I think it's a commentary on the Republicans just not being adequately aggressive and thinking in terms of of having energy and following up that nobody on the Republican side has said. You know, Senator Feinstein is exactly right, and we should do on a bipartisan basis. What Senator Feinstein has recommended. I mean is this can't be that hard to do that. It really shouldn't be that hard to do that. You know, I've got to you suggested Congress put an then to all of this. I think that the president has five enemies now that he's dealing with it, all want his destruction. Number One, the deep state, as his attorney said, the the selective leaking on this president of of top secret intelligence information is unprecedented. Number Two Democrats, as you point out, wake up every day they kill still can't believe they lost the election, and they wake up with the thought, how do we destroy the president? Number Three a deeply lying in corrupt news media that not only colluded with Hillary in the campaign, they've been out to destroy him from day one. Then you've got weak Republicans who won't take your suggestion and fight back because Frankly, this whole Special Council needs to be shut down now. And then you've got the never Trump for people, the five groups, and they want relevance and they want to be able to say to the world, see told you so. I don't know at this point in time, where are his allies. Well, I've I've been recently ever since that we aren't speaking. I played last week about this whole the sickness of Comey and Mueller in this whole thing. I've gotten a surprising number of Republican Congress when the Senators contacting me and asking me to get more involved in talking about what we should do to get back on offense. And I think that there's a lot bigger hunger for having a positive approach that reaches beyond the current cycle than than people might have thought. I think I think we may be surprised to find out how many people are eager to have a chance to get involved and to do something positive. Yeah. Well, listen, I'll tell you the people that have been most defensive of the president, that see this the way we see it, the Freedom Caucus members and none of the very people that it wasn't Paul Ryan that got the healthcare bill passed in the House. It was the Freedom Caucus. And I think it's beyond frustrating, Mr Speaker that we, you know, we find ourselves in a position where we now have a special counsel that got appointed because you had a selective leak by an FBI director in and of itself, maybe a felony committed by him. He might have violated the Records Act. He might have also violated a teen US Code four in terms of you know, he had a legal obligation if he thought somebody was trying to obstruct justice and he stood there shocked, and perhaps if he was stronger, he would have left. Uh, if he thought something was inappropriate and he didn't leave, he selectively leaks government information and then gets the his mentor and his cohort, Robert Mueller, to be the special counsel, which he set out to do well. And and let me make a point here for all of our listeners, because I think this is one of the things that confuses Washington. UM, Comey has Comey is part of the deep state, but Comey is part of the sickness. UH. Nobody should be confused about this. And I'm going to give you two examples. Comey was deeply worried that when President Trump said something to him about whether or not General Flynn might be innocent, that it would have a chilling effect on his unf agents. You go back and read these activets. Well, Barack Obama said publicly that he thought Hillary Clinton was innocent. Now why is it if Barack Obama said the president, then President States says publicly he thinks somebody under investigation is innocent. That doesn't have a chilling effect. By the way, can I can I just be a little bit of a wise ass like I think you've known me all these years? No, I gotta do this, you know, if we're all upset about you know, government's influencing elections, which, by the way, we've had testimony the Russians did it before this election, they'll do it after this election. And yeah, of course they try to break in, but no votes were changed at all. But does it matter that that Barack Obama use State Department funds to try and unseat and used his political team to unseat an ally in Israel by the name of Prime Minister Yah? Who I mean? Did he not to the very thing that everyone thinks that they're so aghast and shocked by well, and of course that's part of that's that's part of the whole problem of the modern world. But look, I don't think I don't want to in any way defend the Russians. No, not either. I'm just saying, but this whole gigantic double standard is more than astonishing. All right, stay right there now, the brand new book. He's gonna be at Bookends in New Jersey, Ridgewood tonight at seven o'clock New king Ridge is gonna give a talk and then I'll be signing books and hopefully make it back to Hannity, which may not happen because I'm to keep promoting the living daylights out of this, and the crowd is gonna be so long you're gonna call me say the hell with your show. I'm gonna be on the show, all right, So we're gonna have the speaker tonight, uh Tenny Eastern. His book is called Understanding Trump. I think the definitive, the definitive book now written about the President and how he was able to outperform all expectations and win the presidency. Quick break more with Speaker king Rich. His book is up on Hannity dot Com and it's called Understanding Trump. Straight ahead right, former Speaker of the House, no King Rich. He's written a brand new book. And if you don't understand, or if I honestly, if you don't want to be spun by the media, and you want to understand this Trump phenomena. Everybody was laughing. No, but he thought he could win and the attacks against him by the swamp. This is the definitive book, and it's called Understanding Trump. Is gonna be at book ends in Ridgewood, New Jersey for all our w R listeners in New York at seven o'clock tonight. He'll be speaking and signing books. Tell us what you know, give us some headlines about the book. Well, look the books an effort to say, first of all, this guy, you know, Trump, is really different. And one of the problems with the elite media, other than the ideological hatred, is they keep trying to place him as though he were a normal politician. This is a pure entrepreneur, a guy who believes in action, the guy who believes in dreaming big, a guy who takes huge risks. Uh, and he plays by the rules that fit. If you're an entrepreneur, the kind of guy who builds Trump Tower, or builds his eighteen golf courses, or creates, uh, you know, the number one rated TV show. Uh. And you go down the list of what Trump has achieved, and I think people need to understand you can't measure him as though he's Barack Obama or George W. Bush or even a Ronald Reagan. He's one of the most unique people. I write rank him frankly with people like Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln as as people who are really outside the norm. He's in the news media cannot relax and just try to say themselves, if this guy is so smart, he not only had to be a billionaire, he then pivoted and beat sixteen Republicans for the nomination. He then pivoted and beat the news media and a billion dollars in Hillary Clinton for the presidency. Maybe there's something he understands and they just kind of bring themselves to do that. And so I decided, as close to I doing him a good while, that I would write a book that really tried. That's not called predicting Trump. I don't believe you can predict Trump. I don't think Trump can predict Trump, but I believe. But it's called Understanding Him because I do think they are underlying patterns. I'll give you one that you know well, because New Yorker you've known him for years. Trump will always CounterPunch. If you hit him, he will instinctively immediately CounterPunch. By the way. You know what I am, what a counterpuncher? Exactly? Do you two get along? Well, yeah, we really do. We've seen some of my own fights and He's like, man, you fight as hard as I do. Alright. The book is called Understanding Trump. Bridgewood, New Jersey, Tonight, seven o'clock Speaker Gang, which will be speaking signing books when we come back. Wide open telephone. Sarah Carter blows open this, Loretta Lynch, comey, connection of obstruction. I am on the side of the dice. So very simple question that should be asked is did Donald Trump or any of his associates in the campaign colude with Russia and hacking those emails and releasing them through the public. That's where we started six months ago. We have now heard from six of the eight Democrats and this committee, and to my knowledge, I don't think a single one of them asked that question. They've gone down lots of other rabbit trails, but not that question. Maybe that is because Jim Comey said last week, as he said to Donald trum that on three times he assured him he was not under investigation. Maybe it's because multiple Democrats on this committee have stated they have seen no evidence thus far after six months of our investigation and ten or eleven months of an FBI investigation of any such collusion. I just suggest, what do we think happened at the Mayflower? Mr? Sessions are Are you familiar with what spies called tradecraft? A little bit that involves things like covert communications and dead drops and brush passes, right, that is part of it. Do you like spy fiction? John Lcker, Ray, Daniel Silva, Jason Matthews, Alan First, David. Do you like Jason Bourne or James Bond movies? No? Yes? Have you ever in any of these fantastical situations heard of a plotline so ridiculous that a sitting United States Senator and an ambassador of a foreign government colluded at an open setting with hundreds of other people to pull off the greatest caper in the history of escuator. Thank you for saying that Uh. Senator Cotton, It's just like through the looking glass. I mean, what is this? I explained how in good faith I said I had not met with Russians because they were suggesting I, as a surrogate, had been meeting continuously with the Russians. I said I didn't meet with them. And now the next thing, you know, I'm accused of some reception uh ap plotting some sort of influence campaign for the American election. It's just beyond my capability to understand. And I really appreciate Mr. Chairman, the opportunity at least to be able to say publicly I didn't participate in that and know nothing about it. And I gather that's one reason why you want to testify today in public. Last week, Mr Comey, and characteristic, dramatic and theatrical fashion, alluded ominously to what you call innu window that there was some kind of classified intelligence uh that suggested you might have colluded with Russia or that you might have otherwise acted improperly. You've addressed those allegations here today. Do you understand why he made that allusion? Actually? I do not, um that's happen. I know nobody has provided me any information. Thank you bout limited to have a lot of questions. UM. Mr Blunt asked you if you had spoken in response to Mr Commy's statement to you after his private meeting with the President on February fourteenth or February Uh, you said that you did respond to Mr Comy. Mr Commy's testimony said that you did not. Do you know why Mr Comey would have said that you did not respond him on that conversation with you on February fourteenth, I do not. Um. It was a little conversation, not very long, um, but there was a converse station and I did or respond to him, perhaps not to everything he asked, but uh he I did respond to him, I think in appropriate way. Do you know why Mr Comey mistrusted President Trump from their first meeting on January six He stated last week that he did, but didn't state anything from that meeting that caused him to have such mistrust. To believe, I'm not able to speculate on that. Let's turned to the potential crimes that we know have happened leaks of certain information. Here's a shortlist of what I have uh, the contents of alleged transcripts of alleged conversations between Mr Flann and Mr kisel Yak, the contents of President Trump's phone calls with Australian and Mexican leaders, the content of Mr Trump's meetings with the Russian Foreign Minister and the ambassador, the leak of Manchester bombing, the Manchester bombing suspects identity and crime scene photos, and last week, within twenty minutes of this committee meeting in a classified setting with Jim Comey, the leak of what Mr the basis of Mr Comey's in the window was, are these leaks serious UH threats to our national security? And as the Department of Justice taking them with the appropriate degree of seriousness and investigating and ultimately going to prosecute them the full suctence of the law. Thank you, Senator Cotton. UH. We have had one successful case very recently in Georgia. That person has been denied bail, I believe, and is being held in custody. But some of these leaks, as you well know, are extraordinarily DAN damaging to the United States security and we have got to restore a regular order principle. We cannot have UH persons in our intelligence agencies are investigative agencies are in Congress leaking sensitive matters on staff. So this is uh, I'm afraid will result in is already resulting in investigations, and I'm fear that some people may find that they we say hadn't leaked. Thanks you, My time is expired. Before the record, it was stated earlier that the Republican platform was weakened on the point of arms for Ukraine. That is incorrect. The platform was actually strengthened, and I would note that it was the Democratic car I'm gonna I'm gonna jump in here. That is Senator Cotton of Arkansas. I mean he has submerged as the total hero. Uh today you just heard it. Well, you know the president wasn't under investigation eleven freaking months. Is there any evidence of collusion, because there are people on this committee that have said there's no evidence of collusion eleven months and six months into their specific investigation, eleven months of black helicopter conspiracies and tinfoil had conspiracies never ending in the destroy Trump media anyway, I thought that was an amazing day to day on top of Jeff Sessions, very forceful, just opening remarks, just blew it out of the water. Jay Seculo was with US Chief Council for the America in Center for Law and Justice and is now apparently working with the President. UM. Welcome back to the program, Jay, how are you. Thanks great, John. I think Jeff Sessions has done just an incredible job today testifying. Yeah. I mean, this is what really amazes me is I'm watching this eleven months, Jack, right, no evidence and people on that committee have said, no evidence. Why are we still here? Well, this is for this of the politics of it, because there's no case. I mean, James Comy laid out that there was no case. So if we look at what James Comy's already said, both in his written testimony and his oral statements, he acknowledged that the president was you know, it's not just he's not under investigation. He was never under investigation. That's number one. Number two, James called me acknowledged that there was no obstruction of justice as it relates to this Russia probe. And number three, as I've I've said, James Comey is the leaker. Jeff Sessions today forcefully, directly and properly said that while he appreciated the opportunity to appear before the Committee. He said he's gonna follow longstanding Justice Department of practice and cannot and will not violate my duty to protect the confidential communications I've had with the president. Unlike James, call me, let me ask your juxtaposition. Yeah, I mean, this is the most amazing thing there. You have a guy, James Comey, who purposefully leaks, which, by the way, I think and I think you agree with me, as a violation of the Records Act. On top of the fact that he had an obligation. I was stunned. Had I been stronger, I would have left. And and I'm not sure if if there was obstruction, that's up for Muletor decide. And I'm thinking, okay, then if you thought that, then you're violating also eighteen USC UH sixty one and eighteen USC four. Okay, you're the lawyer, not me, then no, no, you know, I wouldna say. Here's the irony of this. He said, he's not the one to make that determination except what the case involvement. Hillary Clintony did, he was the one. So he likes to play judge and jury when it suits his agenda, and he doesn't want to play judge and jury when he can leave something hanging and Sean, you said something critical that people are forgetting, and we got to remind people this. This has been This investigation didn't start on May seventeenth when a special council was appointed. This investigation has been going on for nine months. Well, how is it, then, the Jay, how is it that I'm reading a report of the report of the report today Mueller is stocking his staff with Democratic donor lawyers and and literally hiring the swamp, including a Clinton Foundation lawyer that was hired by Hillary to fight back against Freedom of Information Act requests against their email server. Well, look, I mean, here's what you've got, and this is just the situation as it exists. The special counsel has been appointed, and the special counsel has a mandate. Now, the thing that always makes me concerned when I look at these cases and I've been involved in Kate. Look, I was in the middle of the lead lawyer in the I R S targeting scandal that was involving the I R S and the subsequent investigation by the Department of Justice. People try and tend to want to forget that. I'm that's my case. So I know what these deplointma who justice investigations are like or not like in depending on the circumstances. And here's what you've got that mandate at the end, and matters related there too. But I'm gonna go back to a fundamental issue here, and that fundamental issue, whether it's Bob Mueller and the entire staff that he's got as a special counsel, the issue is going to be was their criminal culpability aimed at or targeting the President the United States? And the answer to that is there's nothing, and they've all acknowledged there's nothing. I mean, you have said. This is what I don't understand seen any of it, ince of any of this speaking is nonsense. It reminds me of of Patrick Fitzgerald, and he knew on day one that Richard Armitage was the leaker and the investigation should have been shut down then and there. And even unless I can't believe I'm saying this, Alan Dershowitz has been dead on accurate about all of this in a different ways, about civil liberties and equal application under the law. Find me a person, I'll make up a crime for them, you know, and think you know, after three years and all the money spent. You know, the only thing he could get was what Scooter Libby on a perjury charge, which is by the way, a perjury trap. So I'm asking you this, if you know, if you look at the congressional and D O G, d O J investigations. Okay, now you have Now you have called me that sets it up to get a special counsel hired. Now you have they have his, his mentor that's in charge of it. And now you have his mentor hiring all these Democrats, including people that obviously have a conflict of interest having been on Hillary Clinton's team regarding emails. Now you have done. You know, you have handled a lot of these things issues as a lawyer, and you know, and you've done criminal cases, a lot of criminal cases. And you want to Supreme Court decision at the Georgia Supreme Court last year, I recall the biggest, biggest uh seven seri case in the country representing the State of Georgia in a major criminal case. So you're you're gonna ask me the criminal question. I know where you're going, all right, I'm asking the criminal question. Yeah, so that there's no there there and what's going to happen Sean. And this is where what happens in these You've got multiple three parties basically Congress, the House and Senate and the Special Counsel trying to investigate this at the same time, which is a collision course. I mean, that's what happens on these. It's a collision course. And I think what Rod Rosenstein said today is, you know, you look at the situation. He's the Attorney General acting basically for this investigation. And the fact is it comes down to and and this is the pot can't get past this point. You cannot legally get past this point that James Comy and has written submissions said never under investigation, not under investigation, no obstruction with reguard to the Russian probe. And then he's the leaker. And that argument he's made, which is is ridiculous that this was his personal document instead of the document of the Department of Justice. We let's see what he's done. He writes a memo about a conversation he had with who the President of the United States in his role as the By the way, he writes it in a government car and a government computer. Whose property is it? According to the Records Act, it's our property United States of America. Then he puts it in his government desk, where he holds it in his government desk until he decides after he gets fired to take it out of that desk or to remove it before he got fired and send it to a law professor who leaked it to the New York Times for the sole purpose of obtaining a special counsel, which he did. Now, this committee that's doing the questions today, as far as I know, have not received that memo. You're kidding me. That's my understanding is right now that memo is has only been established right now with the special counsel. These committees haven't seen this matter. What about the conflict I mean if he I mean, did did Jeff Sessions coordinate his testimony today with with the special counsel? Well, what about how does Comey get away with doing that? Well, you know, I think it raises an interesting the issue, and that is under the conflict section. I mean, the idea that James Colemy is a witness if there was, but again, there's nothing there. But if there, if they were to proceed down some you know, rabbit trail path of of saying there's some type of trying to show established an obstruction, which I again impossible in my view. Why would you let your witness, if it was James Comey, get on a stand, so to speak, or appear before the United States Congress. I mean this raises a whole host of issues. Now, those issues that Rod Rosenstein said today in his testimony, those issues will be addressed at the time that they're addressed, and that's how you do those. You don't. You don't speculate to what IF's and what might we know? What the law is, the laws the law, and Rod Rosenstein would have to make a determination if there was a conflict for some lawyer had to not be involved in one part of the case, or whether if there was an investigation of James Comey, which I think there should be, whether that's done by the special Counsel, whether that's done by d J. Those will come up in due course, and as lawyers will handle those in due course, as the lawyers for the president, you handle those in due course. You don't. You don't speculate on the what ifs, what maybe here, what I gotta, I gotta what do you take a Sarah Carter's discovery and and their blockbuster piece. She's going to join us next. That in fact, that James Comey confronted Loretta Lynch about the fix being in and her putting the kabash on any indictment of Hillary Clinton. I mean, that is breathtaking to me. That is breath taking. I will not be shocked if that ends up being the actual conclusion. Remember this is an attorney general. According to if he was telling the truth, James Comey said that calling the matter, don't call it an investigation involved in Clinton campaign. And then of course then the tarmac. Uh, and I know Senate Judiciary Committee members are demanding Lynch now testify. All right, Jay Sekula, always a pleasure. Thank you. We'll see you tonight on Hannity Tenney Eastern on the Fox News Channel along with new king Ridge. We got a great line up tonight. Sarah Carter will join us tonight. She joins us at the top of the next hour. All right, when we come back, we'll get to your call. Sarah Carter is up next. What a blockbuster report she has about Comey confronting Loretta Lynch about the fix being in on the Hillary Clinton email server matter. But Mr Clapper then went on to say that, to his knowledge, there was no evidence of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. We did not conclude any evidence in our report. And when I say our report, that is the n s, A, FBI, and CIA with my office, the Director of National Intelligence, that had anything any reflection of collusion between the members of Trump campaign and the Russians. There was no evidence of that in our report. Was Mr Clapper wrong when he said that, I think he's right about characterizing the report which you all have read. We did not include any evidence in our report. And I say our that's n s, A, FBI, and CIA with my office, the Director of National Intelligence, that had anything that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was no evidence of that included in our report. Did evidence exist of collusion, coordination, conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors at the time you learned of twenty sixteen efforts? I don't know whether or not such collusion, that's your term, such collusion existed. I don't know. The big questions, of course, is is there any evidence of collusion you have seen yet? Is there there is a lot of smoke. We hadn't smoking gun at this point, but there is a lot of smoke. Do you agree with this conclusion that the president has reached there was no evidence of collusion? You know, we haven't seen any of that whatsoever, George. We've been looking and showing everything that they possibly have that has not led to that. Uh. We have ultimate to all of us have the utmost respect for Bob Mueller, both on the Democrat and Republican side. I believe he's going to do his job thoroughly. We will accept his recommendation and path pathway forward. And I think that's extremely important that we all agree this is the right person, to right time to do this type of work. So if the Attorney General or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation? In theory? Yes, Has it happened not in my experience, because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that without an appropriate purpose. We're oftentimes they give us opinions that we don't see a case there, and so you ought to stop investing resources in it. But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason. That would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience. At one point, the Attorney General had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me. But that was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we're to close this case credibly well. It concerned me because we were at the point where we had refused to confirm the existence as we typically do of an investigation for months, and it was getting to a place where that looks silly because the campaigns were talking about interacting with the FBI in the course of our work. The Clinton campaign at the time was using all kinds of euphemisms, security review matters, things like that for what was going on. We were getting to a place where the Atturnent and I were both gonna have to testify and talk publicly about it. And I want to know what she's going to authorize us to confirm we had an investigation, and she said, yes, but don't call it that, call it a matter, And I said, why would I do that, and she said, just call it a matter. And again, you look back in hindsight, you think, should I have resisted harder? I just said, all right, isn't worth This isn't a hill worth dian on. And so I just said, okay, I mean as the President United States with me alone saying I hope this. I took it as this is what he wants me to do. No, I didn't obey that, but that's the way I took it. The Attorney General, previous Attorney General asking you about the investigation on the Clinton emails, saying that you've been asked not to call it an investigation anymore, but to call it a matter, and you had said that con used to you. Can you give us additional details on that? Well, it concerned me because we were at the point where we had refused to confirm the existence as we typically do of an investigation for months, and it was getting to a place where that looks silly because the campaigns were talking about interacting with the FBI in the course of our work. The Clinton campaign at the time was using all kinds of euphemisms, security review matters, things like that. For what was going on. We were getting to a place where the turn Gil and I were both gonna have to testify and talk publicly about it. And I want to know what she's going to authorize us to confirm we had an investigation. And she said, yes, but don't call it that. Call it a matter. And I said, why would I do that? And she said, just call it a matter. And again, you look back in hindsight, you think should I have resisted harder? I just said, all right, isn't worth This isn't a hill worth dian on. And so I just said, Okay, the press is going to completely ignore it. And that's what happened. When I said we have opened a matter, they all reported the FBI has an investigation open. And so that concerned me because that language track the way the campaign was talking about the FBI's work, and that that's concerning It gave the impression that the campaign was somehow using the same language the FBI, because you were handed the campaign language and told to be able to use the campaign. And again I don't know whether it was intentional or not, but it gave the impression that the Attorney General was looking to align the way we talked about our work with the way political campaign was describing the same activity, which was inaccurate. We had a criminal investigation open, as I've said before, the Federal Geer of Investigation. We had an investigation open at the time, and so that gave me a queasy feeling. You know, those tapes are amazing. I mean, Comey never pressured. Well, I was pressured by Comey. I was pressured by by the President. I was pressured by Loretta Lynch. Okay, if you can't get that straight and you're under oath, any Republican would themselves be looking at a perjury charge, maybe an obstruction charge. It's unbelievable the double standard that exists. Now, you know, the list keeps getting longer. How is it that nobody else in the media is playing for you what we play and that is really simple. That is no evidence of collusion, all right, joining us now. We talked about it earlier, Sarah Carter would Circle dot com and her block bost story today about this interaction between Lynch and Comy. Thanks Sean. Yet, John and I were able to kind of track down that second meeting, that meeting that former FBI Director Comey had with Loretta Lynch and what was so fascinating to me, and I think this is this is the area of the story that's most interesting is that when Director Comy approached her with this like sensitive document, it was a communication between two political figures. Um, this document is classified, but it was a communication that basically said Lynch was going to put the kabash on any kind of indictment, on any kind of probe into Hillary Clinton. And when he confronted Lynch, this is according to lawMy Chris who were directly briefed on this, But I want to slow down here, she had put in writing that she is going to block any any investigation into the Clinton's any lawbreaking. Well, well, it was two political figures connected to Lynch that were one was reassuring the other that don't worry, Lynch has already made a promise that she's gonna put the kabash on any kind of indictment or prosecution of of Hillary Clinton. And when he approached her with this piece of evidence in at the d o J. He went to the Department of Justice to meet with her, she stared at him. This is according to lawmakers that were briefed by Comey. She stared at him for what seemed a steely silence. He described it that lasted a long period of time, was very uncomfortable. And then she asked him if there were any more questions, and he said no, and then she asked him to leave the office and did not answer him at all. Isn't that all the obstruction of justice where you come from, Sarah, it's the evidence. Yeah, if the evidence proves to be true, if that piece of evidence which he briefed, Now this is not just our sources on Sunday. What was really interesting with Lindsey Graham actually brought this up and he talked about this on one of the Sunday shows and he said, you know this piece of evidence that is out there that you know right now, Congress is trying to verify whether this is with whether this is actually true or not. But Comey had a piece of evidence that he presented to Lauretta Lynch that basically said between two political figures that she would put the kabash on this. So I think there definitely lawmakers want answers to this. They want to know what that was. And I'm sure this is something that he briefed uh the lawmakers in close session about. That was why he couldn't talk about it in the public hearing. It was basically because of how that evidence was collected, how it was obtained, and what evidence it was, where it came from. This is, to me, is the most unbelievable thing. Why was this done in the closed session after we watched the public session. Why wasn't this brought out in public? Why did call me what possible justification could call me have for not moving forward with an investigation into obstruction, especially when you add to that the meeting on the tarmac with Bill Clinton. Well, apparently the way that this evidence was obtained and how it was obtained and where it was obtained from was the reason behind its classified nature, according to lawmakers that we spoke with. So that was the area that they were most concerned about. And UM, they didn't want to talk about that in the public setting because obviously there's there's reasons for intelligence collection that they don't want to discuss publicly. Now, remember there was a Washington Post story and I just want to bring you back to that, UM, a Washington Post story that stated that b Wasserman Schultz there was the stubious email from Debbie Wasserman Schultz UM and I believe it was Podesta. I'm not one percentage sure on that, but there was an email between Debbie Wasserman Schultz and someone else who said that Lynch would basically not go forward with any um and it was it was actually given to the FBI by the Russians, that this evidence was actually given to the FBI by the Russians. And what happened was the Washington Post, so that said that the story was dubious, that he based all of his investigation into Hillary on this faulty email. And what some people are saying is no, there really is an email. There really is a communication out there that's sensitive that has been verified as fact. And right there, Sorry, I gotta I gotta do this real quick, all right, So we continue with Sarah Carter hard new Blockbuster along with John Solomon at Circuit dot Com. Is James Comey in a fascinating story, met privately with members of Congress. This is after his testimony last week and explained a frosty exchange with Loretta Lynch, the Attorney General at the time, when he confronted her about possible political interference and a in the Hillary Clinton email investigation. After showing Lynch a sensitive document that she was quote unaware that the FPI possessed, and during his testimony last Thursday, call Me alluded to the exchange with Lynch where she ordered him not to refer to a criminal probe of clinton handling of classified emails as an investigation, but rather as a matter, and he suggested it smacked a political spin. But then he ended up doing it anyway, because I guess he's not strong and everything, and then he found this other I want to go back now. So to other lawmakers, everything's fine, no worries here, right, don't worry. She's got it covered. We're gonna put the kabash on any indictment of Hillary because the Loretta Lynch is in our pocket. Isn't that pretty much what they said? Well, apparently that's what was That was what was being discussed. I mean apparently between the people that these emails. Now, we don't know this specific classified email other than what we know from what the Washington Post reported, which Comy later said was nonsense. On the Hill, he said, those those stories are not true. And that's interesting because there was another lawMy because I spoke with us, that said, you know, Comey's account to Congress. What he was saying to Congress behind closed doors doesn't sink with those media reports, which means it isn't it isn't in line with what the Washington Post was reporting on that story. Could there be two separate emails? Could there be information that was coming from the Russians and then there was this other piece of evidence. I mean, we don't know that. What we do know is that there's a highly sensitive communication that Comey had his hands on that made him very concerned. And according to the lawmakers who were briefed on this, that was not a dubious piece of communication. It was actually something that the FBI felt was very valid, and that's why he presented it to Lynch. It was interesting because a it into the lawmakers who were briefed by him. You know, he asked her the question about Bill Clinton meeting Bill Clinton on the tarmac in Phoenix last year, but then he followed it with would you please take a look at this and handed her that communication. And it was at that point when she looked at the communication that everything went silent and she no longer wanted to talk to him and asked him to leave. How does he take that, not follow up on that, not to get an investigation on that, and not conclude, Oh my god, the attorney general is now running interference for Clinton and has conspired to stop any investigation or any possible indictment when we know she committed felonies. And do you know what the timeline is on all of this, you know, Sean, I think that's the great mystery here, right. I mean, when we hear his testimony, he he lets more out this last testimony that Comey gave. He talks about the way Lynch had asked him to call it a matter and not an investigation. Then he talks about this um other incident that he can only talk about behind closed doors because of its classified nature. But then he also goes through you know Trump and alludes to the fact that, well, the reason I didn't I didn't go um to anyone is because well I really couldn't. I wasn't sure what was going on over at the d o J. There were the right people in place there. I felt kind of cowardly. I didn't want to tell the president, you know, I didn't. I didn't want to uh face the president and tell him these things. If I would, if I could look back now, I would have done it differently. This is all kind of strange coming from a man who had the FBI. He you know, personally, I think that the talk of being cowardly and all of that, it seems it's I would like to question him on that. Basically, I'm not saying that it isn't true. I mean, that's his own feelings. But he's a strong man, and he's very smart, and he's very calculating, and so it's for me, it's interesting is that he laid everything out on the table at this hearing. He kind of spilled it all out there, and you have to wonder if there's some other kind of motivation behind that. Is there a reason for him to do this. Is he trying to get information out there? And why? Unbelievable story, credible reporting as always, Sarah Carter Circuit dot Com. We're gonna stay on this, I promise you, and you'll be joining us on TV tonight UH TENNY Eastern on the Box News Channel. You've been doing an amazing job and and thank you for your hard work. We really appreciate it. Eight hundred nine Poll one Shawn. At the bottom of the hour, we'll get to your calls. Will recap the day Attorney General Sessions, you know, outraged today at any thought that he may have colluded with anybody, was piste off today as the hearings began. Will recap that and more straight ahead now till the top of the hour. Toll free telephone number on those busy breaking news days eight nine four one, Shawn if you want to be a part of the program. Obviously, top story today the Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his testimony before the Senate and Intelligence Committee, which, by the way, as I pointed out earlier, he did voluntarily. As I pointed out earlier, in the rest of the media just seems to not really care about the truth and maybe it wasn't the best decision. And are they now going to expect every single solitary you know, member the Trump administration to talk about their contacts with Russia. Well, he agreed to meet in public with these people, He agreed and allied their fears. If that's what it even is at this particular point in time. You know, as a senator, it is part of your job, and every senator, all one senators meet with foreign dignitaries. That's that's kind of standard operating procedure protocol, you know, ambassadors and dignitaries, and you know, it's part of what their duties are. And in this case of the Russian ambassador and other Russian officials, they also simultaneously met with dozens of Democrats Pelosi and Schumer and and Casey and McCaw ascal and can't well, and it just goes on. It's almost everybody. And the meetings that Sessions had, you know, despite all these efforts to turn them into the biggest scandal in the history of man, kind of guy's doing his job. And the d o J has consistently denied the existence of a third meeting at the Mayflower Hotel with the Russian ambassador. I mean, you know, God forbid, I meet with so many people on a regular basis, talk to so many people on a regular basis to four hours on air day. If anyone ever asked me what I did on the show yesterday, I'm gonna be like, um, I could not tell you the lineup of last night show. Let's put it that way. I know, Linda, can you tell me the lineup of last night's TV show? Because what happens is that show is finished, and then I'm focused on the next show. I mean, I can, but that's because I watched DV. Are you like all good citizens should? No? I agree, but and of course, but I honestly would have trouble. I'd have to really go back in my mind's eye and think, like, I know, we started the show with my opening monologue, and then well, there's nothing going on. I mean, there's just nothing going on. You know, you just have plenty of free time, lots of times to think about all of the different story reason a length, because you know, it's just it's quiet. Well. The funny thing is is my friends talk about the Hannity brain and say, oh, ask Kennedy, what Reagan's you know statistics for after eight years in office? I got one better than that. You're you do have a ridiculous memory. I think one of your best and weirdest qualities is your ability to remember all over five affiliates we have. You know their call letters, you know what the station logo is, you know who the people are that work at the station. You know that's a good point. Probably people think you put it up on the screen. You never have to look it up. You know it by heart. All right. But here's the other thing. Now, that's my businesses and my work. Now, if I meet somebody out someplace and I see them the next night, I'll forget their name, which is so embarrassing to me. I will forget. And it's not that I've tried the you know, the Carnegie you know what is it? Yeah, it just doesn't work for me. And then I'll give you another example, like right now I have to I have I could not tell you what was on Monday night's TV show. I can't tell you. I can't tell you who the guests were on the show Monday. So I'm like the worst person I ever put under oath because they're gonna think you're lying. And then they'll go to me in the all right, we'll remember Reagan statistics and I'll rattle them all off. And then they'll say, we'll tell us your affiliates, you know which are talking Kansas, and I'll be able to rattle it off. And that's frustrating. I mean, it would not be good for me. I think you'd be bringing me a cake. I think I think the brain does a wonderful thing, and that is that it retains that which is important and get rid of the rest of it. So that means that the people I meet whose names I forget are not important. That's a horrible don't remember what they look like. You'll look, Oh, I know that person over there answered, I'm like, what's wrong with listen? I've even I've even been at dinners with people that I have known for years, and I'll be whispering to either a friend or my wife or whoever. You if you're there, you know, if it's an event, and I'll be who who? What's your name? Okay? It's embarrassing. And it's not that I don't love the people I do. I just I don't know. It's like there's only so much capacity in terms of the actual I don't think name for the first four or five. Shut up, Come on, you know it's true that she's too slow. What's her name again? Remember her? Sunshine? You know me? That's what used to say about me. Now, that was to get under your skin because I was testing you, and you, by the way, you absolutely hid who you are for years. You just were like quiet, quiet, quiet, quiet, quiet, quiet, quiet, and all of a sudden boom, look what appens? Sneak attack I'm like, all right, Well, it reminds me a little bit of my daughter, because if you meet my daughter, Hi, how are you? Your daughter's ridiculously no, no, no, no, until you get to know where. Then she is off the hook, out of control, in charge, the funniest, most entertaining person you'll ever meet. But not if you just meet her like she just meet her, you'll think she doesn't talk. No, that's true. She's very shy at the outset, at the outset, sort of like my dog Gracie. You meet Gracie, she's insane for the first five minutes, and I'm just like, all right, you gotta ignore it for five minutes and then act like you care she's in the room, and then she'll be all over you with love. That dog is the best. Well, Marley is the best. Marley's great because Marley played catch with me. I love that part. Are you play catch with her? Oh? She just she brings me the toy constantly and I have to throw at least five times. If it's less than five, she gets annoyed. And also, all right, let me get to the phones here. Let's say hi to Victor Is in Hollywood, Florida. Victor, Hi, how are you probably pretty hot down there like it is in New York today? What's going on, sir? I'm good. I have a comment about the the Comy testimony when he was asked his interpretation of Trump's uh telling him, I hope you can let this go, and he interpreted it, in his words, as an order. Correct. Correct, It wasn't what you got from even even though he said that I hope, he interpreted I hope as an order. Okay, So my question is how often do you ignore or not listen to the president's order if you take it as an order? I mean, as you of the movie A few good men when Nicholson is understanding can handle the truth? Well? Well, when he said, sir, when you've given order, is it possible that order was ignored? No, it was not. Order was forgot? No it was not. But here's the difference. Now. You gotta remember, because Comey also had a legal obligation. If he thought that was an order, that what he's saying is the president was ordering him to in fact do something that he felt was unethical, inappropriate, and even bordering on obstruction, which is how the liberals and the left are interpreting it. Well, then eighteen USC four kicks in, and that means that he had a legal responsibility to report it, you know. And I was so stunned I couldn't leave the chair. I was, you know, to be if I had been stronger, I was nauseous. I mean, all the emotionality. So go ahead and finish your point though, well, well, the point is again, how often does does anybody who works under the president ignore the order? If you're not going to report it as you you said, is obligation, okay, then why who In the past, I would, as I see, I would have followed up with different questions than than some of these senators congressmen, because I believe they missed the mark a lot of times. I don't know if it's on purpose or not, but I would have said, how often, Director, comey, have you when your experience ever ignored or not followed a direct order from the President of the United States? And he would have probably answered, well, never, it's it's never been done. I can't recall the time when anybody's ignored an order. So then why did you ignore it? Why did you not follow it? Let alone report it? Okay? So it doesn't. It just contradicts his whole testimony. It just exposes him more as the liar that he is. Well, i'd look, you know how I feel about Comey, and I'll be honest. You know, some people are saying what I what I've concluded about him is is unfair. Um, I honestly, you know, I've no so many law enforcement officials in my life, but I can tell you this. I know guys in the FBI. I love these guys in the FBI. Some of them are my friends in the FBI. And they were so devastated in July of last year when he laid out a case for obstruction of justice and then said never mind. You know, extreme carelessness does meet the legal standard of gross negligence. They were shocked. They were One guy told me he was embarrassed, and everybody he worked with was embarrassed. Now, I'm sure that there are some people that like James Comey, but I think others like me see that he was fully and completely politicized sadly for his part. And I don't know what else to say. He Um, he just lost it in the end there and contorted and just into you know, the only decision he made was to protect Hillary. The only decision is we just had Sarah Carter on is to protect Lauretta Lynch. The only decisions he's making here we're self serving for Democrats. Victor, good call, appreciate it. Back to our phone. Madeline is in Illinois, Madeline High, how are you glad you called the Sean Hannity Show. Hey, thanks great listening to you guys every afternoon. Thank you. My my complaint is that Comey has deep ties with the Clintons. Why this has never been investigated? I went back on an article from Washington Standard dated September twenty nine. Both he and his brother Peter have profited millions from the Clinton Foundation, and I want to know why that is not brought up. Listen, there were two articles that I brought up today, and that was one of them. I do not know. One was the bright Bar piece, and that is Mueller high as Clinton Foundation lawyer for Russia probe that that was the one you're talking about here. The second is Robert Mueller stocks his staff with Democratic donors. I am you know, I tweeted out Alan Dershwitz today. Nine years ago, Alan and I had a stupid fight on radio, and they'd be perfectly blunt. I regretted. At this point in my life, I'm a little more mature. I don't always agree with him. He's he's political, but the guys smart Harvard professor um, I think we we we agree on so much, especially as it relates to Israel and you know, the battle against anti Semitism and radical Islam. I mean, I've read his stuff over the years, and but he's tweeting out something that is very profound about the law. And he's tweeting out that these special counsels have this investigation creep mode that they get into, and he is pointing out there's no obstruction, no way, shape, matter of form. And he's like, all these Democrats know it, and they're doing it anyway because they're playing politics. And he's saying, does anybody here care about civil liberties, our constitution, the rule of law? And he's onto something here, Any honest attorney, constitutional lover, Well, someone that believes in equal justice under the law is going to conclude exactly what Dershowitz has concluded here. And so I've been retweeting him. I don't think he knows me for a whole In the Wall although I didn't meet him once at a Pat Robertson event and interestingly years ago, and we actually had a nice exchange then and we kind of we're letting bygones be bygones. But it became one of the classic cannedate fights and during the impeachment time. But that's what's at stake here. This is now, you know, Patrick Fitzgerald all over again. On day one, Patrick Fitzgerald knew Richard Armitage was the leaker. He should have shut down the investigation. But he goes on and on and on for years, and what does it end up with. It ends up with a perjury trap for for Scooter Libby. It's so ridiculous. And uh, you know, I'm looking at who they're hiring here. They're hiring the swamp Clinton Foundation lawyers. No conflict of interest here, especially if you want the real Russian conspiracy. You know, then we got you know, stocking his staff with Democratic donors. You know, New Gingrich is right. He sparked a media meltdown with his tweet challenging the fairness of this investigation. And I'm standing by my position that Mueller needs to shut it down because we know now there's no obstruction of justice. Congress should shut it down. They're too stupid, and they're too pathetic, and they're too weak. And you know, of my list of five people that are trying to destroy the presidency of Donald Trump, Republicans are on it. Weak Republicans, never Trumpers there on the list. Deep State that's on the list, Democrats on the list, destroy Trump media on the list. I mean, it's it is an obstacle that is so monumental for this president to get, you know, I mean, you know, I'm so happy to see that the mining industry, oh, their first profitable quarter in a couple of years. Well, that's good. And you know, Mad dog Man is slamming Congress for inhibiting military readiness. And you know, then we've got decision time at the Supreme Court. Imagine if Hillary had picked the Supreme Court justice. Oh, by the way, a Trump apprenticeship plan is aimed at filling six million job vacancies. Well that's pretty good. Just getting people back to work, getting them out of poverty, getting them off of food stamps, you know, getting them to participate in the labor force once again. One more quick called here, as we say, hide to Patty is in Ventura, California. I lived a little south of you for five years in Santa Barbara. All right, well that's a little north actually, but that's cool. Oh I'm sorry North, You're right North. I apologize as south is Los Angeles beautiful place up there too. Yeah. Great, Just so all sick of the extreme left. There's such store losers and the destroy Trump media and they're just so sick of obstructing Trump and his administration from doing their jobs for like six months now, and I'm just I'm sick of their filing lawsuit and creating so much smoke and there's no fire. So here's the thought. I'm just wondering, can someone like Trade Goudy or Jay Secular, anybody because they please maybe file a lawsuit for obstruction of justice against the establishment Democrats and liberal media on behalf of all of us. The only way is there's a couple of reforms we need. Number One, we've got to change the libel laws in the tree and if you liabel somebody, the press needs to start paying for their lives. Number Two, um, and that is, if it's approvable, outright scandalous lie, you've got to have some recourse. Um, as it relates if the president doesn't clean out the deep state. Now, it's at some point you're gonna have to blame him and the Obama holdovers. And when it comes to the media, I guess it's my job. I'm taking on my shoulders to do everything I can do to expose them as the liars they are. But it's as bad as I've ever seen it. Hannity Tonight, ten Eastern on the Fox News Channel, New king Ridge will join us. Of course, we'll talk about Attorney General Jeff Sessions. More importantly, Loretta Lynch confronted by James Comey over the fact that she may have put the kabosh on any possibility of a Clinton indictment over the email server scandal. Well, if that's not obstruction of justice, I don't know what is. Sarah Carter's blockbuster report all of this covered in ways the media will not tend. Eastern Live. Hannity tonight, Foxy. Back here tomorrow. Thanks for being with us. M