December 4, 2025 • 28 mins
In this episode of the Sean Hannity Show, Sean delves into the troubling issue of unvetted Afghan refugees and the security risks they may pose to the United States. Joined by Oklahoma Senator James Lankford, they discuss the lack of transparency from the Department of Homeland Security regarding the evacuation and vetting processes during the Afghanistan withdrawal. With thousands of individuals flagged for security concerns still untracked, Sean and Senator Lankford highlight the implications of these oversights and the ongoing national security threats the nation faces. Tune in for a critical assessment of immigration policies and the importance of vetting those entering the U.S.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Two Sean Hannity Show, eight hundred and nine point one,
Shawn our number. If you want to be a part
of the program. It is sad, it's pathetic, it's remarkable,
it's inexplicable. I mean, you can use any adjective you
want to use. They're all appropriate. The idea that we
let all these unvetted illegal immigrants into the country, and
(00:22):
we had a case where we knew we were allowing
people of questionable character and associations into the country as
a result of the botch withdrawal from Afghanistan. Yeah, we
abandoned Americans behind enemy lines. I was counting the days forever,
and then nobody seemed to care. We had promised Afghan
(00:45):
allies that we would help them, didn't say that we
would allow them all into the country or allow them
into the country unvetted. Here's Oklahoma Senator James Langford talking
about how no one has seen the Department of Homeland
Security report on Afghan refugees and why do I suspect,
deep in my heart there isn't one.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
As anyone in this body read that report from DHS
now on how they're handling the Afghan refugees. I would
go ahead and creemptive. The answer no, because none of
us have seen the report yet. Here's what we don't know,
But yet this body demanded in the last r to
be able to get from DHS, we demanded to know
(01:26):
crazy things like this, the number of lawful US permanent
residents that were evacuated out of Afghanistan. We don't have that
number yet. We don't know how many were special immigrant
visa holders. We don't know how many were actually applicants
for special immigrant visas. We don't know the number that
had any other immigrant status. We don't know the number
who actually worked for our government that was actually evacuated.
(01:49):
We've not been told, though we demanded it to have
it by November the thirtieth. We don't know the number
of people that work for a partner government or any
other entity that we were affiliated with, though we asked
for that. We don't know the number of people that
actually came through the process and were later determined to
be security threats to the United States that had slipp
through the process. We asked for that. We asked for
that to come in by November the thirtieth. That's not
(02:11):
been turned over. We asked for the number of people
that were getting parole that their parole was then terminated
because of some other criminal activity or something else. We
asked for that. That's the number they have. They've not
turned that number over. We asked for even the number
of interviews that had been conducted. We've yet to receive that.
(02:32):
In fact, there has not been a single public hearing
in the Senate on Afghan refugees, not one.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
We do know certain things that we've been able to
discover over seventy six thousand, and this goes back to
Lindsey Graham questioning DHS Secretary Alejandro majorcis what we knew
about the people that got on those planes, those cars,
planes in a hasty manner that we allowed into our country.
Speaker 3 (03:03):
And well we we we did.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
We did drop some people off in certain areas, and
we've vetted them for a couple of weeks. We don't
have any evidence that that any of that ever took
ever took place. We do know that six thousand, eight
hundred and sixty eight, according to the Department of Homeland Security,
were flag for derogatory information, over five thousand, flag for
(03:26):
national security, nearly a thousand, flag for fraud, nearly a
thousand flag for public safety, and we do know that
there's over a thousand cases still open. We have no
idea about these people and nearly a thousand national security risks.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
That we know of that are still at large.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Anyway, joining us now to discuss this, you know, and
this is in addition to you know, we don't know
the number. Is it eight ten, twelve, twenty million unvetted illegals.
We saw them pouring across the border day in and
day out, and we will lie to repeatedly, the borders closed,
the border is secure. We will lie to about these
(04:08):
these Afghan nationals. Oh no, they've been vetted very very thoroughly.
We're safe, We're secure. Well, now, we have multiple instances
of Afghan nationals that have been arrested for plotting and
planning and scheming attacks on our country. And we have
one National guardsman twenty four years old that is clinging
(04:29):
to life. We lost a twenty year old National guardswoman
from again, both of them from West Virginia. And we
don't have any answers and we don't have any information
on it. I mean, is it is the height of irresponsibilities,
the single most preventable national security threat that I've ever
seen in my lifetime. And you know, I keep saying
(04:51):
that these people that allow this to happen have blood
on their hands, and they will continue to have more
blood on their hands. And I've pointed out many many
times times known terrorists, murderers, rapists, you know, other violent criminals,
cartel members, gang members, drug dealers. We know are in
the country. We know they let them in. We don't
know where they are now. They we had great success
(05:14):
for example, the DOJ for example, had a big case today.
They identified, as we reported earlier, the DC pipe bomber.
We now know who the individual is. We'll find out
more than the ensuing hours. And you know, we learned
a lot of the little presser today, but we're going
to learn a lot more.
Speaker 3 (05:31):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (05:32):
Here to weigh in on all of this is James Langford.
He's been saying for years that you know, more needs
to be done to screen and bet in any individual
that enters our country. He's been saying it's in Biden
got into office, highlighting the failures of vetting, not vetting
these these refugees from Afghanistan, highlighting how open borders and
(05:54):
not vetting people coming into the country is you know,
a clear and present danger and national security risk anyway,
Senator Langford.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Welcome back.
Speaker 4 (06:04):
I glad to be back with you and John.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
We don't so you can't get a report on the
vetting of these people. Now I can go back and
play Lindsey Graham in a second, but you know, we
don't have a full report that went through every individual
that they allowed into this country, do we.
Speaker 4 (06:21):
We still don't have that because that they couldn't occur
on it. And the biggest challenge what the clip that
you played before was actually during the Biden administration when
we couldn't get any of that information to be able
to come in from the Biden administration at all. But
we still can't get all of that because a lot
of those things are required to be able to come
in from an Afghan government that obviously didn't even exist.
The Taliban's not going to turn over and to be
(06:42):
able to say here are the details on it. So
vetting somebody from Afghanistan where there's no functioning, operating government,
trying to be able to determine are they a threat
or not simply means one thing, did we as Americans
have information on this Afghan that they were a terrorists
to check yes or no, if we had information they
were terist. They wore let out and weren't allowed to
be able to come in, at least most of them.
(07:03):
Some of them we know we're later. But then the
rest of it was we just assumed the best of
everyone on that. We can't assume that in a war zone.
But the Biden administration did and let thousands of people in.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Well, I mean, that's the point. And we don't know
where they are, we don't know what their radical associations are.
Did you see the report this week that showed that
some of the vetting that they did do apparently included
getting information from the Taliban directly, not exactly the most
credible source.
Speaker 4 (07:33):
Yeah, not exactly the most credible source. That too, like
asking China ab telling us more about fentanyel trafficking that
that's not exactly the most credible source.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
Oh yeah, I don't know what we do what we
can do at this point. I mean, I do tip
my hat to the Department of Homeland Security and Tom
Holman and Christy Nome, and I tipped my hat to
Dan Bongino and Cash Battel, the FBI director and Pam Bondi,
the Attorney General, because they've been doing everything humanly possible
(08:03):
to track down these people in this country. But I
don't know how you possibly go back and vet millions
of people that they allowed to pour into the country
while simultaneously lying to it. You know, if your kids
get in trouble, usually not as mad at what they
say is if they lie to you about it, right,
(08:25):
and they just lied spectacularly to us.
Speaker 4 (08:28):
They did over and over again. I would say a
good example of this that I beat the drum on
over and over again coming across our poor southern border
during the Biden administration, where a group of individuals that
the Biden administration identified as special interest aliens. These are
individuals coming from areas of known terrorism, but we didn't
have any records on them, so we couldn't say they
were a terrorists. But they came from that area, from
(08:50):
that region, from the particular family that it looked like
they were from that area. Well, the Biden administration just
let them in, but they over and over again said, well,
we're informing the FBI so we can get more information
on them. There were thousands of people that the Bide
administration led into our country that they actually identified as
a threat, said the FBI was actually going to attract them.
(09:11):
I met with the FBI and the FBI during that
time period under the Bide administration, said there's no way
we contract thousands of people, nor do we even have
the complete lists of all those people that they were
allowed into so nor could they in any way they'll
have the personnel. They don't even have a list on it.
That's the list that the Trump administration is actively going
after right now to chase down thousands of people with
(09:33):
Bide administration. Let in that even the Biden administration said
they came from terrorist aias or known areas of terrorism
and we know nothing about them.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
Senator, they came from over two hundred countries, many of
them even Iran, if you can believe it. You know, Egypt,
pome of the Muslim Brotherhood. Afghanistan is another country, but
over two hundred countries. You know, people were allowed into
this country without any vetting process.
Speaker 3 (09:55):
Quick break right back.
Speaker 1 (09:56):
We'll continue more with Senator James Length Oklahoma on the
other side. Also, your calls coming up eight hundred and
nine to foot one, Shawn, our number if you want
to be a part of the program. Now, Senator James Blankford,
Great State of Oklahoma is with us. We've lived through
this era, especially since Donald Trump has made it onto
(10:18):
the political scene, where the American people have been repeatedly
lied to the complicit medium. I think nothing more than
an extension of the Democratic Party. You know, pushed the
Russia hoax narrative. It's been proven to be debunked in
a lie. They pushed the you know, dirty Russian disinformation
(10:40):
dossier bought and paid for by.
Speaker 3 (10:42):
Hillary again a lie.
Speaker 1 (10:44):
We learned from Tulsey Gabbard's declassification that rank and file
senior career intelligence officials that in fact, they had ascertained
that there was no Trump Russia collusion right after the
twenty sixteen election, and Barack Obama and his political appointees
decided to come up with a new intelligence assessment basically
(11:05):
sabotaging the incoming president because it was originally designed to
prevent Donald Trump from ever getting elected. All of these
instances happened, and now the latest you know, conspiracy that
has been pushed and shoved down the throats of the
American people has been debunked. And that is even the
top Democrat on the House Intel Committee said that the
(11:28):
Navy Admiral Frank Midge Bradley, you know that this report
that Pete Hegseeth gave a kill them all order against
these narco terrorism this drug smuggling vote is now admitting
a Democrat that the admiral confirmed there was no such
order at all at any time. And even ABC News,
(11:50):
Martha Rattitt's not exactly a fan of Donald Trump or
anything Republican or conservative, reported that according to sources, the
two survivors that they talked about the double tap, as
they call this type of operation, were believed to be
trying to continue the operation salvaging the drugs. This is
(12:12):
what she's saying to quote tonight, we have new information.
According to a source familiar with the incident, the two
survivors climbed back onto the boat after the initial strike.
They were believed to be in communication with others in
salvaging some of the drugs. Because of that, it was
determined they were still in the fight and valid targets.
(12:32):
And that's not what we've been hearing. Let me play
that report tonight.
Speaker 5 (12:36):
New information, According to a source familiar with the incident,
the two survivors climbed back onto the boat after the
initial strike. They were believed to be potentially in communication
with others and salvaging some of the drugs. Because of that,
it was determined they were still in the fight and
valid targets. A JAG officer was also giving legal advice.
(12:58):
So again, David, that video will be key.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
Oh well, that's a very different report and a very
different narrative than what we've been hearing. And there's always
this rush to judgment that we have with the media
and the Democratic Party, and it gets a little sickening
over time. It's not fair to the American people. They're
being lied to repeatedly.
Speaker 4 (13:18):
Yeah, we're in a situation where we're all looking for
the old school Paul Harvey rest of the story. Every
time we try to get a story, there's always a
piece they're holding back on it. I mean, we've had
the same situation where the media covered up how the
Biden administration weaponized the DOJ. We had members of the
House and the Senate that literally had their phones being
tracked on it as they were fishing and looking for
(13:40):
additional information in the Arctic frost investigation, Telsea Gabbert who
you'd mentioned before, was on a watch list as they
were actually tracking her getting on and off the plane
while she's a sitting member of Congress. Over and over again,
they were weaponizing the DOJ but the media never wanted
to be able to talk about that. They just leave
accusations at President Trump's feet on it. So this is
a place way that now we are the American people.
(14:02):
We have more media sources like your radio program. We
have more places on social media where people can go
get accurate information. I just continue to tell people, don't
trust everything that you read in every spot. Go get
the rest of the story every time, and to be
able to find out the rest of the facts. And
that's important no matter where you get the tree from.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Well, we appreciate what you're doing. These are incredible times
in Washington. I will tell you that I was happy
to get out of your swamp yesterday. I was there
for two days. But we appreciate you being with us.
Senator Langford, we always appreciate you being on the program.
Thank you so much for being with us, and hope
to catch up soon.
Speaker 6 (14:37):
Now.
Speaker 3 (14:37):
We covered my buddy Stephen A.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
Smith, and he had this very viral moment when he
went out and he said about Senator Mark Kelly, how
dare you when he and five other elected representatives, huh,
you have a duty to disobey orders? Illegal order, Okay,
but none of them could identify one. I'm not sure
(15:01):
why stephen A decides to do this. I think you know,
he's just got a passion before punishment. But he went
back on the view and it came up as a
topic today and he's sparring with the ladies of that
hard hitting news show.
Speaker 5 (15:18):
Lisa, I'd love to give you the opportunity to perhaps
change your position on what you say.
Speaker 7 (15:24):
I'm not changing the thing you want to say loud
and wrong. Well you could call it loud and wrong.
Oh you want it. You're entited to your opinion. I'm
entitled to mine. He's the reality of the situation. First
of all, I don't give a damn what Pete hex
Saith has to say, because I will tell you right
now he was never qualified for the job. When you
talk about DEI and eradicating that. Excuse me, what was
he doing hosting Fox News on the weekend and all
of a sudden he's the Defense secretary? Is give me
(15:45):
a break? I don't care what he has to say.
You get that out the way as if it tains tomorrow. Kelly,
what I was talking about is military. What I did
was get on the phone with family and friends who
have served in the military, and I said, we're not civilians.
This is not the court of law. You can be
implicated for implying something if you are a former military
member or you are a present military member. It wasn't
(16:07):
what Mark Kelly said. It's the fact that he was
a combat Navy pilot who served in the military, who
would tell folks ignore an order when it could get I.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
Said, illegal legal.
Speaker 7 (16:20):
He said, you don't want to follow an an unlawful order,
and that is in the military clod of kind I'm
saying to you, which I which I'm aware of, which
I'm aware of it.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
It didn't sound like you were aware of that.
Speaker 7 (16:34):
Well, no, no, no, I disagree with you.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
It's ask a question.
Speaker 7 (16:38):
Two governors, by the way, text me to tell me
I was wrong, and I agree with you, and I
had and I had, and I had two senators that
reached out to me and said, you aren't wrong at all.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
It is the height of your responsibility for anybody to
say this. The only reason these Democrats are saying it
is because Donald Trump is the commander in chief and
they just hate Donald Trump.
Speaker 3 (17:06):
That's it. Stephen A.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
Smith was right, is right, They were wrong, are wrong,
and what they did was extraordinarily dangerous and they knew
what they were doing. Anyway, eight hundred and nine to
four one, Sean, if you want to be a part
of the program The Buckeye State, Ohio, Matt Sean Hannity Show,
What's going on, Matt, How are you?
Speaker 8 (17:27):
I'm doing good, mister hand I'm.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
Good, sir. What's on your mind today?
Speaker 8 (17:32):
Well, I was I wanted to talk about something you
mentioned on I believe it was Tuesday about Luigi Mangoni's
supporters being furries.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
Well, no, I what I said, But there he had
a court hearing and all these Luigi Mangioni, you know, sycophins,
and apparently he's been getting thousands of letters from women
that want to date him, marry him, beare his children,
which I find strange and bizarre considering being accused of
cold blooded murder of a father and a husband, and
(18:05):
you know, shooting him in the back of the head.
I'm not sure why people would worship at the altar
of somebody like that, and the evidence seems pretty incontrovertible
to me.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
But at the protest.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
But not only the people that love him and adore
him and are worshiping him, but a bunch of you know,
these furries now show up at every event, and I
don't know what a furry is. I have no idea.
I've asked people to explain it to me. Nobody on
my show really knows. I mean, they give some bizarre explanation,
but I can't get a straight answer.
Speaker 8 (18:38):
The only way I can explain it from my understanding is,
you know.
Speaker 3 (18:41):
They are Do you sound like a furry? Are you
a furry?
Speaker 8 (18:45):
I am not a furry, sir.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
Okay, so, but you're an expert on furries.
Speaker 9 (18:48):
No.
Speaker 8 (18:49):
I dressed up as Winnie the Pooh one time for
Halloween to pease my wife. But I don't identify as
a as a fair. So, but it's it's kind of
a it's a gender identity thing.
Speaker 1 (19:02):
Well, I'm told that schools, if kids say they identify
let's say as a cat, are allowed to put a
tail on. And where it's a school, have you heard
of instances like that?
Speaker 8 (19:15):
I've heard of that. I can't substantiate that, at least
not where I'm from, and I've never seen in the
schools around me. But I do know, you know, I'm
in Ohio, Northeast Ohio, and I know Kent State University,
at very liberal arts school, they have a furry club
where individuals meet and you know, have gatherings to be creative,
(19:41):
and it just it seems like it's another way for
people to I mean.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
Is there some type of like sexual connotation to this
that as a matter of fact, I stay on the line.
We're going to add Julie from Washington State. Apparently there's
an issue in her state on this very issue. Julie,
how are you saying hi? To Matt in Ohio? Matt,
say hi to Julie.
Speaker 8 (20:00):
Hello, Julie, how are you good?
Speaker 3 (20:04):
All right? Julie, enlighten us. What's going on in your state?
Speaker 6 (20:08):
Well, good old blue Washington. We have we have teachers
and staff at schools that accommodate furries by putting litter
boxes in the bathrooms and serving them.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
Wait a minute, wait, Julie, Julie, you're making this up.
You got to be making this up? Are you making
this up?
Speaker 6 (20:31):
My grandson absolutely won't go to a couple of the
schools income because of the furries that identify as kitties
or dogs, and they are accommodated, just like trans going
into girls' locker rooms.
Speaker 1 (20:48):
They I have never seen a story about litter boxes, Linda,
Why don't you go to groc and see what Grock
has to say about this.
Speaker 6 (20:59):
Yeah, the parents that are accommodating their kids, it's it's sick.
It's just absolutely gone way over the top, way over
the top. And they wear their tails in their ears
and they're whiskers.
Speaker 3 (21:12):
Uh. And how are parents reacting to that?
Speaker 6 (21:15):
Well, a lot of the parents that you know that
are as crazy as their kids are accommodating them. It's
just a phase or whatever. But there is there is
a sexual connotation too on to the hardcore thees ferries
that then prefer to breathe with animals of their like
(21:38):
or or whatever. I don't know a lot about that
part of it, but I have heard of free date nights,
you know, as they were, so Yeah, it's a it's
a sick part of society for sure. For sure.
Speaker 1 (21:54):
Let me let me give you the answer that I
got from groc Okay, and that's artificial intelligence. Kids in
America are not universally quote allowed to go to school
dressed as furries. There's no nationwide law or policy permitting it.
But the reality is far more nuanced and often restrictive
than viral rumors suggest. Public school dress codes are set
(22:16):
at the local and district level, and furry attire like tails, ears, collars,
full costumes is frequently prohibited if seen as disruptive, distracting,
violating general rules against costumes, accessories, and interfere with learning
or non human emulation. However, enforcement varies widely. Some students
(22:39):
do wear elements cat ears as a headband without issue,
depending on the school.
Speaker 3 (22:48):
Well, apparently this is what they're saying.
Speaker 6 (22:51):
Well, we'll do some deep diving for you, Sean and
see if we can get some pictures of letterboxes and
kitty bolls.
Speaker 1 (23:00):
Well, I'm now discovering in Texas they have the Furries Act.
Unlawful representation of role playing and education would prohibit non
human dress or actions, tells, animal noises, litterbox use in
public schools.
Speaker 3 (23:14):
Like, this is what our government is doing.
Speaker 1 (23:17):
I mean, I immersed myself in substantive issues. I mean,
you know we're dealing with National guardsmen being shot. We're
trying to get the economy rolling and bringing in and
the Golden Age in America. You know, we're talking about
peace around the globe and and this is what they're
dealing with on the local level. Pretty unbelievable. Please, anyway
(23:42):
you want to you want to react.
Speaker 8 (23:43):
To that, Matt Uh, Yeah, I, like I said, I
I teach in a in a school district. I have
not seen with any of our students. I do work
with an individual, an employee within the district that actually
is furry them and their spouse, but it doesn't come
(24:04):
into the school. So I do know that it does
happen outside of the school, but yeah, me personally, I
have not seen it within the school. But yeah, it's
definitely a real thing. It's it's pretty popular in the
certain districts, especially the more liberal ones that are that
are open to things like that.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
Well, I appreciate both of you. Linda sent me an article.
I've never heard of this website, but I'm just gonna
read it anyway. Mc sweeney's. I have no idea what
it is. It says Daily Humor, so I don't know
if I want to read what this one in particular says,
but I don't know. I really don't have time for insanity.
This is nuts. Quick break right back to our busy telephones.
(24:46):
Here's our toll free number. It's eight hundred and ninety
four one, Sean. If you want to be a part
of the program as we continue.
Speaker 9 (24:56):
The final hour roundup is next.
Speaker 4 (24:58):
You do not want to miss Dan. Stay tuned for
the final hour free for all on the Sean Hannity Show.
Speaker 1 (25:32):
Let's get back to our busy phones. Eight hundred and
ninety four one. Shawn is on number. All right, stand
the man in the United Socialist utopia known as California,
Gavin Newsom's California.
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Sir, how are you? I'd say Gavin's the front runner
for Democrats right now. What do you think?
Speaker 9 (25:47):
Well, I think that'd be the huge mistake. And that's
one of the reasons I'm calling Sean is because of
the gas prices here. You know, everybody mentions gas prices
are down nationwide, but I just filled up yesterday at Costco.
I'm down here in Orange County and I paid four
ninety four for regular at a Costco or.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
Ninety four for regular.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
And by the way, Costco's where you're going to get
the cheapest gas, right exactly.
Speaker 9 (26:15):
Yeah, So yeah, I just want to let you know
about that.
Speaker 6 (26:18):
Now.
Speaker 9 (26:19):
I listened to a San Diego station quite a bit,
and that's how I listened to you. And they mentioned
that the gas prices are going down, but they go
down like one penny a day, so you know, so
you know when they say gas prices are coming down
in California, Yeah, to the point of one penny a day.
You know, that's nothing.
Speaker 1 (26:41):
We all Well, you know, let me ask you a question.
You have the highest income taxes in the country, you
have the highest sales taxes in the country, the highest
gas taxes in the country. You have by far the
largest number of illegal immigrants in the country, the nation's
highest poverty rate, highest unemployment rates, and you're highest in
(27:02):
the nation in terms of all these taxes, bloated bureaucracy,
and you still run massive deficits.
Speaker 9 (27:09):
So imagine your next question is going to be, is
why am I still here?
Speaker 3 (27:14):
Okay, answer your own question.
Speaker 9 (27:17):
Well, I was born and raised da in California. My
wife and I we both have elderly parents, so we're
here for that. But we're getting to the point to
where we're just about ready to say, you know, call
it quips.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
But well, look, I can sympathize with that because I
stayed in New York a lot longer than I wanted to.
I did for the sake of my kids, and you know,
I just had to do what I had to do.
But you know what, bring your elderly parents with you.
Arizona's beautiful, Nevada is beautiful, Lard is beautiful, Texas is beautiful,
(27:51):
the Carolina is a beautiful.
Speaker 3 (27:53):
Tennessee is awesome.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
I'm just you know, I have not been one to
be fearful of movie in my life.
Speaker 3 (28:01):
I've lived in New York. I've lived in Rhode Island.
Speaker 1 (28:05):
I've lived in California for five years, I lived in Alabama,
I've lived in Georgia, went back to New York, came
down to Florida, and I will tell you it's brought
in my horizons and I learned so much about the country.
I've traveled to every state now in the country, and
I'm very honored to meet the people in this great country,
and every state has very unique qualities and distinctions that
(28:29):
are unbelievable.
Speaker 3 (28:30):
Anyway, I wish you the best good luck,
Two Sean Hannity Show, eight hundred and nine point one,
Shawn our number. If you want to be a part
of the program. It is sad, it's pathetic, it's remarkable,
it's inexplicable. I mean, you can use any adjective you
want to use. They're all appropriate. The idea that we
let all these unvetted illegal immigrants into the country, and
(00:22):
we had a case where we knew we were allowing
people of questionable character and associations into the country as
a result of the botch withdrawal from Afghanistan. Yeah, we
abandoned Americans behind enemy lines. I was counting the days forever,
and then nobody seemed to care. We had promised Afghan
(00:45):
allies that we would help them, didn't say that we
would allow them all into the country or allow them
into the country unvetted. Here's Oklahoma Senator James Langford talking
about how no one has seen the Department of Homeland
Security report on Afghan refugees and why do I suspect,
deep in my heart there isn't one.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
As anyone in this body read that report from DHS
now on how they're handling the Afghan refugees. I would
go ahead and creemptive. The answer no, because none of
us have seen the report yet. Here's what we don't know,
But yet this body demanded in the last r to
be able to get from DHS, we demanded to know
(01:26):
crazy things like this, the number of lawful US permanent
residents that were evacuated out of Afghanistan. We don't have that
number yet. We don't know how many were special immigrant
visa holders. We don't know how many were actually applicants
for special immigrant visas. We don't know the number that
had any other immigrant status. We don't know the number
who actually worked for our government that was actually evacuated.
(01:49):
We've not been told, though we demanded it to have
it by November the thirtieth. We don't know the number
of people that work for a partner government or any
other entity that we were affiliated with, though we asked
for that. We don't know the number of people that
actually came through the process and were later determined to
be security threats to the United States that had slipp
through the process. We asked for that. We asked for
that to come in by November the thirtieth. That's not
(02:11):
been turned over. We asked for the number of people
that were getting parole that their parole was then terminated
because of some other criminal activity or something else. We
asked for that. That's the number they have. They've not
turned that number over. We asked for even the number
of interviews that had been conducted. We've yet to receive that.
(02:32):
In fact, there has not been a single public hearing
in the Senate on Afghan refugees, not one.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
We do know certain things that we've been able to
discover over seventy six thousand, and this goes back to
Lindsey Graham questioning DHS Secretary Alejandro majorcis what we knew
about the people that got on those planes, those cars,
planes in a hasty manner that we allowed into our country.
Speaker 3 (03:03):
And well we we we did.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
We did drop some people off in certain areas, and
we've vetted them for a couple of weeks. We don't
have any evidence that that any of that ever took
ever took place. We do know that six thousand, eight
hundred and sixty eight, according to the Department of Homeland Security,
were flag for derogatory information, over five thousand, flag for
(03:26):
national security, nearly a thousand, flag for fraud, nearly a
thousand flag for public safety, and we do know that
there's over a thousand cases still open. We have no
idea about these people and nearly a thousand national security risks.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
That we know of that are still at large.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Anyway, joining us now to discuss this, you know, and
this is in addition to you know, we don't know
the number. Is it eight ten, twelve, twenty million unvetted illegals.
We saw them pouring across the border day in and
day out, and we will lie to repeatedly, the borders closed,
the border is secure. We will lie to about these
(04:08):
these Afghan nationals. Oh no, they've been vetted very very thoroughly.
We're safe, We're secure. Well, now, we have multiple instances
of Afghan nationals that have been arrested for plotting and
planning and scheming attacks on our country. And we have
one National guardsman twenty four years old that is clinging
(04:29):
to life. We lost a twenty year old National guardswoman
from again, both of them from West Virginia. And we
don't have any answers and we don't have any information
on it. I mean, is it is the height of irresponsibilities,
the single most preventable national security threat that I've ever
seen in my lifetime. And you know, I keep saying
(04:51):
that these people that allow this to happen have blood
on their hands, and they will continue to have more
blood on their hands. And I've pointed out many many
times times known terrorists, murderers, rapists, you know, other violent criminals,
cartel members, gang members, drug dealers. We know are in
the country. We know they let them in. We don't
know where they are now. They we had great success
(05:14):
for example, the DOJ for example, had a big case today.
They identified, as we reported earlier, the DC pipe bomber.
We now know who the individual is. We'll find out
more than the ensuing hours. And you know, we learned
a lot of the little presser today, but we're going
to learn a lot more.
Speaker 3 (05:31):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (05:32):
Here to weigh in on all of this is James Langford.
He's been saying for years that you know, more needs
to be done to screen and bet in any individual
that enters our country. He's been saying it's in Biden
got into office, highlighting the failures of vetting, not vetting
these these refugees from Afghanistan, highlighting how open borders and
(05:54):
not vetting people coming into the country is you know,
a clear and present danger and national security risk anyway,
Senator Langford.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Welcome back.
Speaker 4 (06:04):
I glad to be back with you and John.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
We don't so you can't get a report on the
vetting of these people. Now I can go back and
play Lindsey Graham in a second, but you know, we
don't have a full report that went through every individual
that they allowed into this country, do we.
Speaker 4 (06:21):
We still don't have that because that they couldn't occur
on it. And the biggest challenge what the clip that
you played before was actually during the Biden administration when
we couldn't get any of that information to be able
to come in from the Biden administration at all. But
we still can't get all of that because a lot
of those things are required to be able to come
in from an Afghan government that obviously didn't even exist.
The Taliban's not going to turn over and to be
(06:42):
able to say here are the details on it. So
vetting somebody from Afghanistan where there's no functioning, operating government,
trying to be able to determine are they a threat
or not simply means one thing, did we as Americans
have information on this Afghan that they were a terrorists
to check yes or no, if we had information they
were terist. They wore let out and weren't allowed to
be able to come in, at least most of them.
(07:03):
Some of them we know we're later. But then the
rest of it was we just assumed the best of
everyone on that. We can't assume that in a war zone.
But the Biden administration did and let thousands of people in.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Well, I mean, that's the point. And we don't know
where they are, we don't know what their radical associations are.
Did you see the report this week that showed that
some of the vetting that they did do apparently included
getting information from the Taliban directly, not exactly the most
credible source.
Speaker 4 (07:33):
Yeah, not exactly the most credible source. That too, like
asking China ab telling us more about fentanyel trafficking that
that's not exactly the most credible source.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
Oh yeah, I don't know what we do what we
can do at this point. I mean, I do tip
my hat to the Department of Homeland Security and Tom
Holman and Christy Nome, and I tipped my hat to
Dan Bongino and Cash Battel, the FBI director and Pam Bondi,
the Attorney General, because they've been doing everything humanly possible
(08:03):
to track down these people in this country. But I
don't know how you possibly go back and vet millions
of people that they allowed to pour into the country
while simultaneously lying to it. You know, if your kids
get in trouble, usually not as mad at what they
say is if they lie to you about it, right,
(08:25):
and they just lied spectacularly to us.
Speaker 4 (08:28):
They did over and over again. I would say a
good example of this that I beat the drum on
over and over again coming across our poor southern border
during the Biden administration, where a group of individuals that
the Biden administration identified as special interest aliens. These are
individuals coming from areas of known terrorism, but we didn't
have any records on them, so we couldn't say they
were a terrorists. But they came from that area, from
(08:50):
that region, from the particular family that it looked like
they were from that area. Well, the Biden administration just
let them in, but they over and over again said, well,
we're informing the FBI so we can get more information
on them. There were thousands of people that the Bide
administration led into our country that they actually identified as
a threat, said the FBI was actually going to attract them.
(09:11):
I met with the FBI and the FBI during that
time period under the Bide administration, said there's no way
we contract thousands of people, nor do we even have
the complete lists of all those people that they were
allowed into so nor could they in any way they'll
have the personnel. They don't even have a list on it.
That's the list that the Trump administration is actively going
after right now to chase down thousands of people with
(09:33):
Bide administration. Let in that even the Biden administration said
they came from terrorist aias or known areas of terrorism
and we know nothing about them.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
Senator, they came from over two hundred countries, many of
them even Iran, if you can believe it. You know, Egypt,
pome of the Muslim Brotherhood. Afghanistan is another country, but
over two hundred countries. You know, people were allowed into
this country without any vetting process.
Speaker 3 (09:55):
Quick break right back.
Speaker 1 (09:56):
We'll continue more with Senator James Length Oklahoma on the
other side. Also, your calls coming up eight hundred and
nine to foot one, Shawn, our number if you want
to be a part of the program. Now, Senator James Blankford,
Great State of Oklahoma is with us. We've lived through
this era, especially since Donald Trump has made it onto
(10:18):
the political scene, where the American people have been repeatedly
lied to the complicit medium. I think nothing more than
an extension of the Democratic Party. You know, pushed the
Russia hoax narrative. It's been proven to be debunked in
a lie. They pushed the you know, dirty Russian disinformation
(10:40):
dossier bought and paid for by.
Speaker 3 (10:42):
Hillary again a lie.
Speaker 1 (10:44):
We learned from Tulsey Gabbard's declassification that rank and file
senior career intelligence officials that in fact, they had ascertained
that there was no Trump Russia collusion right after the
twenty sixteen election, and Barack Obama and his political appointees
decided to come up with a new intelligence assessment basically
(11:05):
sabotaging the incoming president because it was originally designed to
prevent Donald Trump from ever getting elected. All of these
instances happened, and now the latest you know, conspiracy that
has been pushed and shoved down the throats of the
American people has been debunked. And that is even the
top Democrat on the House Intel Committee said that the
(11:28):
Navy Admiral Frank Midge Bradley, you know that this report
that Pete Hegseeth gave a kill them all order against
these narco terrorism this drug smuggling vote is now admitting
a Democrat that the admiral confirmed there was no such
order at all at any time. And even ABC News,
(11:50):
Martha Rattitt's not exactly a fan of Donald Trump or
anything Republican or conservative, reported that according to sources, the
two survivors that they talked about the double tap, as
they call this type of operation, were believed to be
trying to continue the operation salvaging the drugs. This is
(12:12):
what she's saying to quote tonight, we have new information.
According to a source familiar with the incident, the two
survivors climbed back onto the boat after the initial strike.
They were believed to be in communication with others in
salvaging some of the drugs. Because of that, it was
determined they were still in the fight and valid targets.
(12:32):
And that's not what we've been hearing. Let me play
that report tonight.
Speaker 5 (12:36):
New information, According to a source familiar with the incident,
the two survivors climbed back onto the boat after the
initial strike. They were believed to be potentially in communication
with others and salvaging some of the drugs. Because of that,
it was determined they were still in the fight and
valid targets. A JAG officer was also giving legal advice.
(12:58):
So again, David, that video will be key.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
Oh well, that's a very different report and a very
different narrative than what we've been hearing. And there's always
this rush to judgment that we have with the media
and the Democratic Party, and it gets a little sickening
over time. It's not fair to the American people. They're
being lied to repeatedly.
Speaker 4 (13:18):
Yeah, we're in a situation where we're all looking for
the old school Paul Harvey rest of the story. Every
time we try to get a story, there's always a
piece they're holding back on it. I mean, we've had
the same situation where the media covered up how the
Biden administration weaponized the DOJ. We had members of the
House and the Senate that literally had their phones being
tracked on it as they were fishing and looking for
(13:40):
additional information in the Arctic frost investigation, Telsea Gabbert who
you'd mentioned before, was on a watch list as they
were actually tracking her getting on and off the plane
while she's a sitting member of Congress. Over and over again,
they were weaponizing the DOJ but the media never wanted
to be able to talk about that. They just leave
accusations at President Trump's feet on it. So this is
a place way that now we are the American people.
(14:02):
We have more media sources like your radio program. We
have more places on social media where people can go
get accurate information. I just continue to tell people, don't
trust everything that you read in every spot. Go get
the rest of the story every time, and to be
able to find out the rest of the facts. And
that's important no matter where you get the tree from.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Well, we appreciate what you're doing. These are incredible times
in Washington. I will tell you that I was happy
to get out of your swamp yesterday. I was there
for two days. But we appreciate you being with us.
Senator Langford, we always appreciate you being on the program.
Thank you so much for being with us, and hope
to catch up soon.
Speaker 6 (14:37):
Now.
Speaker 3 (14:37):
We covered my buddy Stephen A.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
Smith, and he had this very viral moment when he
went out and he said about Senator Mark Kelly, how
dare you when he and five other elected representatives, huh,
you have a duty to disobey orders? Illegal order, Okay,
but none of them could identify one. I'm not sure
(15:01):
why stephen A decides to do this. I think you know,
he's just got a passion before punishment. But he went
back on the view and it came up as a
topic today and he's sparring with the ladies of that
hard hitting news show.
Speaker 5 (15:18):
Lisa, I'd love to give you the opportunity to perhaps
change your position on what you say.
Speaker 7 (15:24):
I'm not changing the thing you want to say loud
and wrong. Well you could call it loud and wrong.
Oh you want it. You're entited to your opinion. I'm
entitled to mine. He's the reality of the situation. First
of all, I don't give a damn what Pete hex
Saith has to say, because I will tell you right
now he was never qualified for the job. When you
talk about DEI and eradicating that. Excuse me, what was
he doing hosting Fox News on the weekend and all
of a sudden he's the Defense secretary? Is give me
(15:45):
a break? I don't care what he has to say.
You get that out the way as if it tains tomorrow. Kelly,
what I was talking about is military. What I did
was get on the phone with family and friends who
have served in the military, and I said, we're not civilians.
This is not the court of law. You can be
implicated for implying something if you are a former military
member or you are a present military member. It wasn't
(16:07):
what Mark Kelly said. It's the fact that he was
a combat Navy pilot who served in the military, who
would tell folks ignore an order when it could get I.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
Said, illegal legal.
Speaker 7 (16:20):
He said, you don't want to follow an an unlawful order,
and that is in the military clod of kind I'm
saying to you, which I which I'm aware of, which
I'm aware of it.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
It didn't sound like you were aware of that.
Speaker 7 (16:34):
Well, no, no, no, I disagree with you.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
It's ask a question.
Speaker 7 (16:38):
Two governors, by the way, text me to tell me
I was wrong, and I agree with you, and I
had and I had, and I had two senators that
reached out to me and said, you aren't wrong at all.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
It is the height of your responsibility for anybody to
say this. The only reason these Democrats are saying it
is because Donald Trump is the commander in chief and
they just hate Donald Trump.
Speaker 3 (17:06):
That's it. Stephen A.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
Smith was right, is right, They were wrong, are wrong,
and what they did was extraordinarily dangerous and they knew
what they were doing. Anyway, eight hundred and nine to
four one, Sean, if you want to be a part
of the program The Buckeye State, Ohio, Matt Sean Hannity Show,
What's going on, Matt, How are you?
Speaker 8 (17:27):
I'm doing good, mister hand I'm.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
Good, sir. What's on your mind today?
Speaker 8 (17:32):
Well, I was I wanted to talk about something you
mentioned on I believe it was Tuesday about Luigi Mangoni's
supporters being furries.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
Well, no, I what I said, But there he had
a court hearing and all these Luigi Mangioni, you know, sycophins,
and apparently he's been getting thousands of letters from women
that want to date him, marry him, beare his children,
which I find strange and bizarre considering being accused of
cold blooded murder of a father and a husband, and
(18:05):
you know, shooting him in the back of the head.
I'm not sure why people would worship at the altar
of somebody like that, and the evidence seems pretty incontrovertible
to me.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
But at the protest.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
But not only the people that love him and adore
him and are worshiping him, but a bunch of you know,
these furries now show up at every event, and I
don't know what a furry is. I have no idea.
I've asked people to explain it to me. Nobody on
my show really knows. I mean, they give some bizarre explanation,
but I can't get a straight answer.
Speaker 8 (18:38):
The only way I can explain it from my understanding is,
you know.
Speaker 3 (18:41):
They are Do you sound like a furry? Are you
a furry?
Speaker 8 (18:45):
I am not a furry, sir.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
Okay, so, but you're an expert on furries.
Speaker 9 (18:48):
No.
Speaker 8 (18:49):
I dressed up as Winnie the Pooh one time for
Halloween to pease my wife. But I don't identify as
a as a fair. So, but it's it's kind of
a it's a gender identity thing.
Speaker 1 (19:02):
Well, I'm told that schools, if kids say they identify
let's say as a cat, are allowed to put a
tail on. And where it's a school, have you heard
of instances like that?
Speaker 8 (19:15):
I've heard of that. I can't substantiate that, at least
not where I'm from, and I've never seen in the
schools around me. But I do know, you know, I'm
in Ohio, Northeast Ohio, and I know Kent State University,
at very liberal arts school, they have a furry club
where individuals meet and you know, have gatherings to be creative,
(19:41):
and it just it seems like it's another way for
people to I mean.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
Is there some type of like sexual connotation to this
that as a matter of fact, I stay on the line.
We're going to add Julie from Washington State. Apparently there's
an issue in her state on this very issue. Julie,
how are you saying hi? To Matt in Ohio? Matt,
say hi to Julie.
Speaker 8 (20:00):
Hello, Julie, how are you good?
Speaker 3 (20:04):
All right? Julie, enlighten us. What's going on in your state?
Speaker 6 (20:08):
Well, good old blue Washington. We have we have teachers
and staff at schools that accommodate furries by putting litter
boxes in the bathrooms and serving them.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
Wait a minute, wait, Julie, Julie, you're making this up.
You got to be making this up? Are you making
this up?
Speaker 6 (20:31):
My grandson absolutely won't go to a couple of the
schools income because of the furries that identify as kitties
or dogs, and they are accommodated, just like trans going
into girls' locker rooms.
Speaker 1 (20:48):
They I have never seen a story about litter boxes, Linda,
Why don't you go to groc and see what Grock
has to say about this.
Speaker 6 (20:59):
Yeah, the parents that are accommodating their kids, it's it's sick.
It's just absolutely gone way over the top, way over
the top. And they wear their tails in their ears
and they're whiskers.
Speaker 3 (21:12):
Uh. And how are parents reacting to that?
Speaker 6 (21:15):
Well, a lot of the parents that you know that
are as crazy as their kids are accommodating them. It's
just a phase or whatever. But there is there is
a sexual connotation too on to the hardcore thees ferries
that then prefer to breathe with animals of their like
(21:38):
or or whatever. I don't know a lot about that
part of it, but I have heard of free date nights,
you know, as they were, so Yeah, it's a it's
a sick part of society for sure. For sure.
Speaker 1 (21:54):
Let me let me give you the answer that I
got from groc Okay, and that's artificial intelligence. Kids in
America are not universally quote allowed to go to school
dressed as furries. There's no nationwide law or policy permitting it.
But the reality is far more nuanced and often restrictive
than viral rumors suggest. Public school dress codes are set
(22:16):
at the local and district level, and furry attire like tails, ears, collars,
full costumes is frequently prohibited if seen as disruptive, distracting,
violating general rules against costumes, accessories, and interfere with learning
or non human emulation. However, enforcement varies widely. Some students
(22:39):
do wear elements cat ears as a headband without issue,
depending on the school.
Speaker 3 (22:48):
Well, apparently this is what they're saying.
Speaker 6 (22:51):
Well, we'll do some deep diving for you, Sean and
see if we can get some pictures of letterboxes and
kitty bolls.
Speaker 1 (23:00):
Well, I'm now discovering in Texas they have the Furries Act.
Unlawful representation of role playing and education would prohibit non
human dress or actions, tells, animal noises, litterbox use in
public schools.
Speaker 3 (23:14):
Like, this is what our government is doing.
Speaker 1 (23:17):
I mean, I immersed myself in substantive issues. I mean,
you know we're dealing with National guardsmen being shot. We're
trying to get the economy rolling and bringing in and
the Golden Age in America. You know, we're talking about
peace around the globe and and this is what they're
dealing with on the local level. Pretty unbelievable. Please, anyway
(23:42):
you want to you want to react.
Speaker 8 (23:43):
To that, Matt Uh, Yeah, I, like I said, I
I teach in a in a school district. I have
not seen with any of our students. I do work
with an individual, an employee within the district that actually
is furry them and their spouse, but it doesn't come
(24:04):
into the school. So I do know that it does
happen outside of the school, but yeah, me personally, I
have not seen it within the school. But yeah, it's
definitely a real thing. It's it's pretty popular in the
certain districts, especially the more liberal ones that are that
are open to things like that.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
Well, I appreciate both of you. Linda sent me an article.
I've never heard of this website, but I'm just gonna
read it anyway. Mc sweeney's. I have no idea what
it is. It says Daily Humor, so I don't know
if I want to read what this one in particular says,
but I don't know. I really don't have time for insanity.
This is nuts. Quick break right back to our busy telephones.
(24:46):
Here's our toll free number. It's eight hundred and ninety
four one, Sean. If you want to be a part
of the program as we continue.
Speaker 9 (24:56):
The final hour roundup is next.
Speaker 4 (24:58):
You do not want to miss Dan. Stay tuned for
the final hour free for all on the Sean Hannity Show.
Speaker 1 (25:32):
Let's get back to our busy phones. Eight hundred and
ninety four one. Shawn is on number. All right, stand
the man in the United Socialist utopia known as California,
Gavin Newsom's California.
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Sir, how are you? I'd say Gavin's the front runner
for Democrats right now. What do you think?
Speaker 9 (25:47):
Well, I think that'd be the huge mistake. And that's
one of the reasons I'm calling Sean is because of
the gas prices here. You know, everybody mentions gas prices
are down nationwide, but I just filled up yesterday at Costco.
I'm down here in Orange County and I paid four
ninety four for regular at a Costco or.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
Ninety four for regular.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
And by the way, Costco's where you're going to get
the cheapest gas, right exactly.
Speaker 9 (26:15):
Yeah, So yeah, I just want to let you know
about that.
Speaker 6 (26:18):
Now.
Speaker 9 (26:19):
I listened to a San Diego station quite a bit,
and that's how I listened to you. And they mentioned
that the gas prices are going down, but they go
down like one penny a day, so you know, so
you know when they say gas prices are coming down
in California, Yeah, to the point of one penny a day.
You know, that's nothing.
Speaker 1 (26:41):
We all Well, you know, let me ask you a question.
You have the highest income taxes in the country, you
have the highest sales taxes in the country, the highest
gas taxes in the country. You have by far the
largest number of illegal immigrants in the country, the nation's
highest poverty rate, highest unemployment rates, and you're highest in
(27:02):
the nation in terms of all these taxes, bloated bureaucracy,
and you still run massive deficits.
Speaker 9 (27:09):
So imagine your next question is going to be, is
why am I still here?
Speaker 3 (27:14):
Okay, answer your own question.
Speaker 9 (27:17):
Well, I was born and raised da in California. My
wife and I we both have elderly parents, so we're
here for that. But we're getting to the point to
where we're just about ready to say, you know, call
it quips.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
But well, look, I can sympathize with that because I
stayed in New York a lot longer than I wanted to.
I did for the sake of my kids, and you know,
I just had to do what I had to do.
But you know what, bring your elderly parents with you.
Arizona's beautiful, Nevada is beautiful, Lard is beautiful, Texas is beautiful,
(27:51):
the Carolina is a beautiful.
Speaker 3 (27:53):
Tennessee is awesome.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
I'm just you know, I have not been one to
be fearful of movie in my life.
Speaker 3 (28:01):
I've lived in New York. I've lived in Rhode Island.
Speaker 1 (28:05):
I've lived in California for five years, I lived in Alabama,
I've lived in Georgia, went back to New York, came
down to Florida, and I will tell you it's brought
in my horizons and I learned so much about the country.
I've traveled to every state now in the country, and
I'm very honored to meet the people in this great country,
and every state has very unique qualities and distinctions that
(28:29):
are unbelievable.
Speaker 3 (28:30):
Anyway, I wish you the best good luck,
The Sean Hannity Show News
Host
Sean Hannity
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.