Project Veritas Updates - 12.13

Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
All right, an unbelievable news day sit down, because you're
not gonna believe all the news we have on the
deep state. We've got a ton of battles over the wall,
appending shutdown, more fallout as it relates to Michael what's
his name, Michael Cone. But really I want to start
with something, and this is very important because this is

(00:24):
if this is how we are going to treat American
war heroes, we don't have a justice system that is fair,
that represents a constitutional republic anymore. These are not just words.

(00:44):
If you let me just basically, you have now a
former FBI director James Comey boasting how he quote got
away with it, meaning pretty much in trapping General Michael Flynn,
who was a decorated war hero thirty three years in

(01:06):
the military, serving his country five years in combat, on
charges that he lied to FBI interrogators. Even though Comey
has admitted in the past he Comey said he didn't
lie anyone, nor did he say anyone in the FBI
thought so. But when you get to the whole the
bottom line in this sordid case, it is beyond any

(01:31):
comprehension that I think any of us could have what
could actually really happen in the United States. Now, I'm
gonna give you all the details of this, So we'll
start with the Wall Street Journal. So there's a new
FBI three zero two summary of the Flynn interview. And
then deputy FBI Director, by the way, fired for lying.

(01:53):
In part, Andrew McCabe and other FBI officials quote decided
the agents would not general Flynn that it was a
crime to lie during an FBI interview because they wanted
Flynn to be relaxed, and they were concerned that giving
the warnings might adversely affect the rapport. Yeah, and they

(02:15):
also told him that, oh, you're not going to need
your lawyer. This this is just standard stuff. Quote. This
is something I probably wouldn't have done or wouldn't have
gotten away with in a more organized administration. James Comey's
bragging about this, boasting about this on national television. Quote.

(02:37):
In the George W. Bush administration or the Obama administration,
if the FBI wanted to send agents into the White
House itself to interview a senior official, you would work
through the White House Council. There would be discussions and
approvals on who would be there, and and I thought,
it's it's early enough. Let's just send a couple of

(02:58):
guys over. Now if the you know, let me just
send a couple of guys over and then not tell
him he doesn't need a lawyer. They will tell him that,
because if the goal here was to set a legal trap.
Now backtrack, Remember what we've also learned a while ago
now about real crimes committed that nobody seems to care about,

(03:21):
and that was the illegal surveillance, the lack of minimization,
the unmasking in other words, of the identity of General Flynn,
and then the leaking of raw intelligence, meaning the conversation
that they should not have had as he appropriately was
talking to a soon to be Russian counterpart, And yeah,

(03:43):
policy issues came up, and well, we have a different
policy than the last administration. So whatever he didn't say,
that was exactly in connection with probably what they had,
which I'm assuming here was a transcript illegally obtained. Then
you know, there's no way anybody's ever going to have
such a perfect memory, especially at that point much later

(04:05):
down the road. So you have two agents now and
James Comey's bragging cuff. I wouldn't have done this another administration. Well,
this is right at the beginning of the Trump administration,
and I don't think any administration's organized on day one.
And so anyway, the two agents show up at the
White House hours after McCabe's call where he's saying, you

(04:29):
don't need a lawyer. They reported into three h two
that General Flynn had been relaxed jocular clearly saw the
FBI agents as allies. One of the agents was Peter Struck,
who's famous for his anti Trump texts, who thought that
Trump should have lost one hundred million to zero. You
know that's said he was a loan loothesome human being.

(04:51):
Said no, he's not gonna win, said he had an
insurance policy, part of a media elite strategy. Anyway, the
FBI agents had seen the transcripts Flynn's conversation because he
was illegally amassed by Obama administration officials. The three O
two says that rather than flagged this and asked Flynn
for an explanation, the agents decided before the meeting that

(05:14):
if Flynn said he didn't remember something that they knew
he said, they would use the exact words Flynn used
to try to refresh his recollection and if Flynn would
not conform to what they said, they would not confront
him or talk him through it. Now Flynn's lawyers are
requesting probation and community service. This case needs to be

(05:38):
thrown out if we have any sense of real justice
and protections. Fourth Amendment protections, constitutional protections and mccabin struck,
by the way, have both been fired from misconduct, and
this behavior reeks of entrapment. One of these people were
going to be held responsible. Everyone talks about we got

(05:59):
to hold everybody responsible, only if you're a Republican. Apparently,
now it gets even more interesting because I've long believe
that when the facts behind Muller's decision to prosecute Flynn
become publicly known, that this investigation of Muller now becomes
a house of cards. And you know, if if you

(06:22):
could just take the hysteria of the media out of well,
we got Trump, we got him, we got him on collusion.
But no, no, no, no, no, we don't have a collusion,
no evidence of collusion. Through three years of investigating, still
no evidence of collusion. And because they started this way
before even the election took place, so that, oh, I

(06:43):
think we got a campaign finance violation. Well, most smart,
intelligent lawyers don't think you have that either. But at
the end of the day, here, you know, the federalists
had a great piece up today. The federal judge overseeing
flynn sentencing dropping of Hugh Bombshell. Now this has to
do with the revelations that following an order entered late yesterday.

(07:08):
The presiding judge in this case as a guy by
the name of Judge Emmett Sullivan. What's fascinating about him
is remember what they did to Senator Ted Stevens lost
his seat over this whole thing. But he was the
judge that found out all the exculpatory evidence in that
particular case. I don't remember all the details of it
at this point, but there was a grave miscarriage of

(07:31):
justice there and this is the judge that insisted on
finding it. Now, Judge Emmett Sullivan is directing the Special
Counsel's Office to file with the court any three O
two's any memorandum relevant to Flynn's interview. Now, while Flynn's
sentencing memorandum laid out a case for a low level
sentence of one year probation, if you look at footnote

(07:56):
twenty three. This is all in the Federalists today a
bomb revealing basically that the Agents three h two summary
of his interview is dated August twenty second, twenty seventeen.
Now that date is a striking detail because that puts
the three h two report nearly seven months after the
Flynn interview. Then, when you add to the facts that

(08:19):
we already know, it takes on an even greater significance
because first, text messages between Struck and Page indicate that
Struck wrote his notes from the Flynn interview shortly after
he questioned General Flynn on January twenty fourth, just days

(08:41):
after Trump took the old of office. It's twenty seventeen,
so specifically, on February fourteen, twenty seventeen, a month later,
Struck texted Page. Also is Andy good with the F
three h two, and Page responded launch three O two.
Given Struct's role in questioning Flynn, the date three weeks

(09:04):
from the interview, the notation F three O two has
to be Flynn three O two. And it seems like
Paige's position as a special counsel to McCabe seems extremely
likely that what we're talking about here is these text
messages concerned the February twenty seventeen three or two summary
of the Flynn interview, in addition, not the August one

(09:26):
of twenty seventeen, so that the interview happens, is three
O two is filed, They talk about it on text messages,
but yet we have in August twenty second, twenty seventeen.
That wouldn't make any sense. That would mean that something changed,
something changed dramatically. And now we know from the sentencing

(09:49):
memorandum that the Special Counsel's Office has tender to three
O two interview summary dated to twenty second, we can
deduce that there was an earlier three O two form
existing from James Comey's testimony before the House Judiciary and
Oversight Committee, because during that question ing, Trey Goudy asked
whether Comey recalled being asked whether the agents who interviewed

(10:11):
Comy thought he lied during an earlier House hearing. Comey countered,
I recall saying the agents observed no indication of deception
or physical manifestations or shiftiness, that sort of thing, And
the exchange followed. Goudy said, well, who would you have
gotten that from? If you were not present? And Comey
says from someone at the FBI who either spoke to

(10:31):
or I don't think I spoke to the interviewing agents,
but got the report from the interviewing agents. So Gaudy says,
all right, so you would have read the three O
two or had a conversation with someone who read the
three O two. This is where Comy. Oh, I don't
remember for sure, but I think I may have done both.
That has read the three O two and then they

(10:52):
talked to the investigators directly. I just don't remember. Conveniently, now,
President Trump fired Comey on May nine, twenty seventeen, so
the three ZO two of Flynn interview had to have
been read before the August that they're now pointing to
as the three H two. Now, the timing of the rewrite. Now,
let you understand here, if you change a three O two,

(11:14):
you're changing it for the benefit of a narrative that
you're using to now implicate somebody in a crime. This
is an American war hero. So so Comey had to
have read it long before he was fired. So that
would be the February date that we're talking about, and
the timing of the rewrite. This is the three O

(11:35):
two again on Flynn. Now shortly after Peter Struck was
removed from the Special Council's team after his anti Trump
text messages came to light raises the possibility that Muller
wanted a scrub the evidence of Struct's taint. Having a
second agent involved in questioning the Flynn draft. A new
three O two summary would eliminate attacks premised on Struck's

(11:58):
bias against the president. But was that the only reason
the FBI had a three O two? Were there any
differences in the versions? Now go back to February, Graham
and Crassley requested the DOJ Inspector General Harrowitz to conduct
a comprehensive review of the misconduct in the Russia investigation,
and specifically asked Horowitz to answer these questions about Flynn

(12:21):
and the interview and the three O twos. Did FBI
agents document their interview with General Flynn in one or
more three O two's and what were the FBI agent's
conclusions Lieutenant Flynn's truthfulness, you know, wasn't reflected directly in
the three O twos. Were the three O two's edited
and if so, by whom, at whose direction? How many

(12:43):
drafts were there are there material differences between the final
draft and the initial draft. Well, now Sullivan the judge
who wants to see the documents, and ordered Muller by
Friday afternoon to file the docket forthwith, citing memorandum and
FD three O two, and Sullivan ordered the government to

(13:03):
file on the docket any three O two's a memoranda
relevant to Flynn's interview. It all assumes the Special Counsel's
Office still has copies of them and based on other things,
they don't. All right, quick break right back, We'll continue
straight ahead. It's to Sean Hannity show. Smoking is not
about politics, it's about people. There are thirty four million
Americans that smoke. For me, Jewel was a game changer

(13:25):
because you switch to Jewel, it's simple, it's satisfying and
no more smell. I watch people all the time they
run outside and the freezing coal you could be grabbing
their cigarette. Well, with Jewel, you'll take a quick puff
and you're good. That's it. Now. Jewel is designed which
smokers in mind. From its form to technology. It's easy
to use, no buttons, no switches, and the goal of

(13:46):
Jewel is to impact the lives of adults smokers by
providing a satisfying alternative switched to Jewel. You'll wish you
had done it a long time ago. To discover the
smoking alternative that is nothing like any e sig vape
you have ever tried. Go to this website Juul jewel
dot com slash switch America. That's Juul dot com slash

(14:08):
switch America. Warning this product contains nicotine and nicotine is
an addictive chemical. Juul dot com slash switch America. All right,
so we got Comy now bragging about I couldn't do
this in another administration. Now, the issue of when was
the original three O two written, that would be the

(14:30):
report by Peter Struck about General Flynn in the interview.
Why was there a second one in August of twenty seventeen,
What administration would have been organized? All of this ought
to scare the living daylights out of you, because you know,
when District Court Judge Sullivan discovered if he discovers the

(14:51):
FBI tampered with their three O two interview witness summaries
in a bid to set up Michael Flynn, and when
he now knows that General Flynn, this whole admission by
Comey that we just sent him over because we thought
there was chaos over there in the first couple of
days of the administration, and hey, we were just acting. Meanwhile,

(15:12):
they had already surveiled, unmasked, and had intelligence on General Flynn,
and we're not going to give up our hand here now.
The last time Sullivan discovered Justice Department misconduct was in
the Alaska case of Senator Ted Stevens. He not only
dismissed the guilty verdict, Sullivan then appointed a special prosecutor

(15:34):
to investigate the DOJ prosecutors that railroaded him. Now, if
Judge Sullivan, and it seems like he's going to be
true to form here, Now, what did Robert Muller? What
involvement might he have had in this? That's what I
want to know, because the date of the August three
h two is suspicious to me because that means this

(15:57):
is right after he was discovered by Mueller very quietly
never told anybody struck in pager out when he was
told by the Inspector General about these text messages between
the two of them and that they had a political bias.
Now two thousand and eight, Sullivan, you know, Stevens was
found guilty on eight felony counts brought by the US government.

(16:18):
Then he lost his election in Alaska, and when the
sentencing came down in two thousand and nine, the case
was dismissed because of dj corruption. But that was too
late for Senator Stevens, wasn't it because he lost his
re election a few months earlier? You know, if this
happened to a thirty three year veteran, how could anybody

(16:41):
in this country ever expect equal justice, equal application of
our laws and look in the it looked straight in
the mirror and suggest that we're really not a banana
republic instead of a constitutional republic as we should be.
All right, twenty five now ntil the top of the hour,

(17:03):
just to give us summation here, too many details to
get into, James call me bragging basically about setting up
Michael Flynn by sending over FBI agents. You know than
the early days of the Trump administration. Oh, I probably
wouldn't have done this, wouldn't have gotten away with it
in a more organized administration. This is days after literally

(17:24):
the first week of the presidency of Donald Trump. No
administration is going to be that organized. In the Bush administration,
the Obama administration that the FBI wanted to send agents
into the White House itself to interview a senior official.
You would work through the White House Council Council. It
would be discussions and approvals on who would be there.

(17:45):
And I thought, wow, it's early enough. Send a couple
of guys over. But we're gonna tell them, hey, you
don't you don't need a lawyer for this. It's not
a big deal. Now I'm looking at all of this,
and what is really amazing is the presiding Judge Emmett

(18:05):
Sullivan here. It's going to be fascinating to watch this
unfold because what's happening in the sentencing memorandum that they
methodically laid out with this footnote that was dropped that
the agents three or two summary of his interview was
dated August twenty, twenty seventeen. The only problem with that
is that is contradicted by a couple of things. One

(18:26):
is the struck page text messages where they're clearly talking
about the Flynn three O two And more importantly, remember
James Comey was fired in May of twenty seventeen. Okay,
but in an interview with Trey Goudie. The problem is

(18:47):
he's talking about. Yeah, I probably saw that three o two. Now,
that's where it gets fascinating. Now, The New York Times
reported at the time, Now, when this judge Emmett Sullivan
threw out the Ted Stevens conviction ethics conviction, he was furious,
and he took an extraordinary step of naming a special
prosecutor to investigate whether government lawyers ran Stephens case. The

(19:11):
ones that did should themselves be prosecuted for criminal wrongdoing.
That's how angry he was. The New York Times described
him as speaking in a slow, deliberate manner that failed
to conceal his anger, saying that in the twenty five
years he's been on the bench, he'd never seen mishandling
and misconduct like what I have seen by the Justice

(19:33):
Department prosecutors who tried the Stephens case. I know, people,
what are the people carries? One senator from Alaska? Right, Well,
just one person. If there is corruption in the Justice
Department and you're weaponizing and criminalizing, as Alan Dershowitz always says,
political differences, you are losing your country. That's why, as

(19:56):
The New York Times said that he gave a lacerating
their words fourteen minute speech focusing on disclosures that prosecutors
had him properly withheld evidence in that case virtually the
guaranteed reverberations beyond the morning's dismissal of the verdict that
helped it ended Stephen's career. How does he get his

(20:18):
good name back? How does he get his career back? Now?
The judge it was named to the Federal District Court
by Bill Clinton delivered a broad warning about what he
said was a troubling tendency that he has observed among
prosecutors to stretch the boundaries of ethics restrictions to conceal
evidence to win cases. And he named a prominent Washington

(20:41):
lawyer to investigate six career Justice Department prosecutors, including the
chief deputy of the Public Integrity Section, an elite unit
charge with dealing with official corruption, to see if they
would face criminal charges. Now, as the Federalist points out
today and notes rightly, and we have had on this program.
Sydney Howell wrote the great book License to Lie about

(21:03):
this kind of corruption. Andrew Weissman, Mueller's pit bowl has
a history of tampering with FBI three zero two's and
in the end Ron prosecution, which he was involved in.
Weisman destroyed some of the original FBI three ZO two
witness statements that the court wanted to see. And that's
why I have been from day one so critical of

(21:26):
the appointment of Weisman. You know, we heard a lot
about Genie Ray weighing in on the whole Michael Cohne issue.
Genie Ray was a lawyer for the Clinton Foundation. Do
we not see a conflict in all of this? I
am telling you there is so much wrong with this
and getting to the bottom of it is going to

(21:47):
take a commitment to unpeel every single layer of this onion.
I just am stunned that it's even possible that that,
in fact, James Comey would be out there bragging like
there is eventually something is that there's gonna be a

(22:09):
moment where the damn breaks in all of this. By
the way, just to give you an update, Mark Chairman
told Martha McCallum on Fox that three Clinton Foundation whistleblowers
with thousands of pages of evidence documenting explosive allegations, they're
going to be testifying this week. And I'm telling you

(22:30):
there's a lot of stuff going on there now. We
also found out from the Daily Caller that Christopher Steele, Yeah,
the one used the Oh, because campaign finance violations are
so important. The Hillary Clinton and DNC money that was
funneled through a law firm as a legal expense, that
hired the op research firm, that hired the foreign national

(22:52):
that paid money to his Russian sources to make up
lies about Donald Trump, and then used it those Russian
lines to influence the election in twenty sixteen. Now we're
discovering Daily Caller report that the infamous dossier to Strobe Talbot,
a longtime Clinton insider former State Department official. Court documents

(23:14):
released yesterday show that the Steel had shared the information
with Talbot because of the latter's position on the State
Department's Foreign Affairs Policy Board, and Talbot's linked to the
dossier has not been previously reported, and his brother in law,
another Clinton insider, compiled an anti Trump dossier of his
own during the campaign. Oh so we have everybody all

(23:37):
one big family, you know, fest going on here on
every level. Oh, I'm loving this. The President canceled the
annual White House Christmas party for the media, and I
know people say that, but why why should he bother.

(23:59):
Let them have their Christmas party in the media over
the DNC headquarters. That's where it belongs. And you know,
I don't think the DNC will let them call it
a Christmas party. Maybe they'll call it a Winter Solstice party.
But anyway, it's I know it just because they're all going.

(24:19):
I wouldn't go anyway. I wouldn't want to go. Why
are we going to pretend that they're not biased when
they are? It is, And I think other people have
actually gotten invitations. But I thought that was funny. You
know that their heads are exploding pretty much everywhere. Now.
One other thing on Christopher Steele, because this is a
pretty Washington Times had a great piece about this when

(24:43):
he told the London courtroom that he was hired in
to gather evidence that Hillary Clinton's campaign in the DNC
could use to challenge the twenty sixteen presidential election results.
Now they point out that his scenario is contained in
a sealed all a second declaration and a defamation lawsuit

(25:03):
brought by three Russian bankers in London, and the Russian
bankers well their American attorneys, filed his answers Tuesday in
a libel suit in Washington against the investigated firm, Fusion GPS,
which handled Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence officer. Steele
testified that the law firm Perkins Cooee wanted to be

(25:26):
in a position to contest the results based on evidence
that he unearthed on the Trump campaigns conspiring with Moscow
on election interference. In an answer to these interrogatories, Steele wrote,
quote Fusion's immediate client was law firm Perkins Cooee. See
how by the way they're funneling money that's supposed to

(25:46):
be legally How they do that? The very thing that
liberals are so up in arms about Trump might have
violated campaign finance. He spent on the sidewalk. Whatever they
can say anyway, So that was it engage Fusion Perkins
Cooey to obtain information needed for the law firm to
provide legal advice onto the potential impact of Russian involvement

(26:09):
in the validity of the outcome of the twenty sixteen election.
Maybe they were seeing numbers that they're not admitting to
that they thought they'd lose. That's why they have an
insurance policy in a media leak strategy with their friends
that let them off the hook for the crimes they
committed in the obstruction of justice that occurred, and then
of course using that phony Russian dossier as a means

(26:30):
of spying on the Trump campaign to cheat, just like
they did with Bernie Sanders, and then when that didn't work,
just spread the lies Russian lines paid for by Hillary
to the American people. Hopefully that'll influence the election anyway.
Based on that advice, parties like the DNC and her
presidential campaign could consider steps that would be legally entitled
to to take challenge the validity of the outcome of

(26:53):
the election. Democrats never filed a challenge. Steals answer those
suggests that was an option inside Clinton camp, which funded Steel,
through the law firm, through the research group. I know
it gets confusing. We also have the Justice Department. This

(27:13):
is interesting, big headline destroying Struck and Page iPhones after
Mueller's office assided they weren't relevant. This is more new
information today. Sounds like a Thursday afternoon document dump, but
you know, we'll put that aside anyway. I would think
this raised his eyebrows once again. It seems like Democrats

(27:34):
get away with destroying anything they want, but those concerned
about all this misconduct. The Justice Department revealing today and
the Inspector General report that Investigator's white clean the iPhones
that were used by Trump paiding FBI officials Struck in
Page after the so called records office or officer in

(27:55):
Mueller's office decided there was nothing relevant in a newly
recovered batch text messages that had never been made public.
So they saw the proof that these lovebirds hated Trump
had an agenda, quietly fired him. Let's get rid of
these phones, Let's clean him up. Apparently they sent them

(28:15):
back to the manufacturer to make super sure they were clean.
Maybe they had never discussed bleach pit with Hillary Clinton anyway.
The Hill points out that the Inspector General's report partially redacted.
I read it all today, detailing how the office was
able to recover these lost text messages between Struck and Page.
These are the ones, many of which were released, but

(28:37):
not all of them by a long stretch. But now
Struck turned over his iPhone to the DOJ once he
was pulled from Muller's team. Struct's phone was reset to
factory settings reissued to another agent, meaning that it didn't
have any data related to Struct's use on the device.
A records officer with the Special Counsel's Office told the

(28:58):
Inspector General that Ruck's phone was reviewed for text after
it was returned and it was determined to contain no
substantive text messages. And then, as it relates to Page's
iPhone she got from the Muller team, it wasn't located
until September twenty eighteen. Now it hadn't been reissued like
Structs phone, but it too had been reset to factory settings,

(29:21):
quote they called a routine practice within the department. Had
no data related to Page's use of the device, but
unlike Structs phone, Page's device was not reviewed by the
Special Council's records officer for possible records that would have
been kept. And the FBI accepts the fact that not
all texts between Page and Struck were collected by the

(29:42):
FBI's text collection tool, but appreciates and degrees with the
Inspector General's conclusion and explanation that the content of the
text messages exchanged between the two did not appear to
factor in their collection. Blah blah blah, and it goes
on from there. Imagine if you did this, I did
this forget it. Look what they're doing, loan applications, taxi, medallions,

(30:08):
taxes two thousand and seven, Ukraine, not Russia. It just
goes on and on, but no evidence or collusion. Really,
you know, you're gonna get everyone else for spitting on
the sidewalk. We have a lot to get to actually
have a debate later in the program. Some headlines as
it relates to the borders. DHS says that substantial wall

(30:31):
construction will be completed by October twenty nineteen. There is
a quote in Conservative Review of Nancy Pelosi. You know
now she's saying, well, no wall funding, even if it
means the government's closed forever, something to that effect. If
she wants to take on the responsibility, that'll be Look,
we're gonna have to make a decision here. Everybody needs
to know. There's never a government shutdown ever, There's never

(30:54):
it's it's seventy percent of essential services keep going. That
means the military. That means we're gonna fund the government.
We're gonna make sure that everyone gets their Social Security checks.
Nobody's gonna know. Security issues are going to be impacted,
and our troops will be working on Christmas Day and
so on and so forth. I'm not afraid of a

(31:16):
government shutdown, and I don't want people to lose their jobs.
But in every past case, rightly so, people that are
unfairly impacted because of impasses like this, they get their
money that they deserve. It's not their fault that it's
a political battle. But if we're not going to fight
for the security of the country, what else are we
gonna fight for? And the President, by the way, and

(31:37):
the Pentagon have said, hey, they're ready to help build
the wall regardless, which I think is probably the best
way to go anywhere you get the whole twenty five
million billion that would be needed to build it. And
if you actually look at the amount of money we're
paying every year, it costs we you, the taxpayers of
fortune when it comes to border security. You know, we've

(31:59):
gone over this education. When you look at state, local
federal spending, you know we're talking about forty four billion
dollars a year state expenditures, one point seven billion, you know,
federal educational expenditures, seventeen for medical expenditures, thirteen for law
enforcement expenditures. Building the wall is going to save us money,

(32:21):
a lot of it in the long term. All right,
glad you with us our two Sean Hannity show. Right
down our toll free number. It's eight hundred and nine
four one, Shawn, if you want to be a part
of the program. All right. A ton of breaking news
on the deep state. We now know the Justice Department
literally destroyed the tax that were on struck In Page's

(32:41):
iPhones when they were given those phones courtesy of the
Special Counsel's Office. Fascinating how quickly they can they can
get rid of them, clean them up, send them back
to the manufacturer, White Clean, and it's beyond frustrating. We
have Christopher Steels saying that he was hired to help

(33:03):
Hillary challenge the twenty sixteen election results as an August
second declaration with the funneled money through Perkins Couey and
then hiring Fusion GPS, which hires former m I six
agent foreign agent Steel that uses Russian contacts. That of
course full of lies, but it becomes the basis of

(33:23):
a FISA warrants. They don't tell the judge FISA judges
that Hillary paid for it. That information's disseminated, the Russian
lies are told to the American people. It spreads like
wildfire Russian lies to influence an election. And I think
our big bombshell that has come out today are these
comments by former FBI Director at James Comey, because these

(33:48):
basically boasting about setting up General Flynn back in you know,
the first week of the Trump administration. I mean I frankly,
he says, well, this is something I probably wouldn't have
done or wouldn't have gotten away with in a more
organized administration. It was week One's organized about any administration
week one, but in the Bush administration or the Obama administration,

(34:12):
that the FBI wanted to send agents into the White
House itself to interview a senior official. Ha. You'd have
to work through the White House Council and there would
be discussions and approvals on who would be there. And
I thought, it's early enough, let's just send a couple
of guys over. Now, this is after a few other
events happened. One is that we now know Deputy FBI

(34:33):
Director McCabe told Flynn, no, no, no, you don't need
a lawyer for this, Okay, But it becomes the basis
of a you know, of an admission of Lyne to
the FBI. And remember the information they had a transcript
obtained illegally because it had to do with surveillance with
no minimization of an American citizen, and then of course

(34:58):
unmasking of General Flyn and leaking the raw intelligence because
they got a transcript of the whole thing. They're bragging
about setting up a thirty three year veteran here. And
you know, now the judge in this case, this is
going to be fascinating. This is the same judge that
I've been telling you about Emmett Sullivan who literally unloaded

(35:22):
on horrible tactics of the DOJ and the Ted Stevens case.
All right, joining us now, we have two Freedom Caucus members.
They have been in the forefront of fighting on a
lot of these issues. And whether or not there's going
to be a government shutdown, we'll get to that too.
Louis Gohmer to Texas and Representative Jody Heiser Virginia. Guys,
welcome to the program. Thanks for being with us. Hey, Sean,

(35:42):
great to be with you. You know I'm talking to you, Sean,
and I'm glad you brought up Ted Stevens case because
it's another reminder that that was while Mueller was FBI director,
and the one that actually the FBI agent that was
a whistleblower in that case got run out of the
FBI on Mueller's watch, and the one that's that actually

(36:04):
hit excuplatory evidence and basically framed Ted stevens Uh that
agent went on to do well and continue to move
on to bigger and better things. That's the way Mueller
ran things, and now he's in charge of this. It
is an outrage. It is outrage. And let me tell you,
you know, for all of my professional career, as as

(36:27):
I've been prosecutor, I've been court appointed on a defense
case in federal court and state court, had been a
judge in Chief Justice. But but every other law enforcement
agency in the country now video tapes, they audio tape.
You know, you go into an interview room, there is

(36:48):
a camera there so that there is no question about
what is what's said. The FBI has been able to
get away with all of this modernization of communication because
they were so straight and we could trust them, and
when they did an interview, they didn't need an audio
or videotape because they were going to make a note

(37:10):
of what was said and we could trust that. The
trouble with that is now we have caught so many
of the top FBI people under the Obama administration and
now under Trump administration of lying that I think it's
time and I hope that Judge Sullivan will help initiate
this by having a ruling. I'm afraid he's not going

(37:32):
to do it, but a ruling that sends a message
to the FBI, come on, end to the modern age.
You start audiotaping because your notes that you try to
manipulate and maybe even change after the fact to manipulate,
are not good enough to go after somebody for lying.

(37:53):
Let me get Jody in on this. I look at
this and I am flabbergasted at the statements of Jim
Comey former find the actions of Comey and the actions
of McCabe. And knowing this judge's background, Sullivan's background in
the Ted Stevens case, I could see him vacating the

(38:13):
whole thing and maybe doing what he did the last time,
and that would be appointing a special prosecutor to look
into the prosecutors. As I've always been saying. Yeah, I
think you're spot on, Sean. I mean here, you know,
these people were so focused on getting Trump that they
were willing to set up a three star general, and

(38:33):
I mean that is appalling. And as you mentioned earlier,
we're talking about the first week of this administration. There's
four things with this they really are disturbing to me.
Is before the interview with Flynn, during the interview, and
then afterwards, there was not a they didn't follow procedure
and even setting up the interviews with Flynn, it's just

(38:54):
kind of casually lessened a couple of agents over here
and talk with him. Then the meeting elf Flynn is
not even aware that it's a it's a formal interview.
It doesn't appear at least that's that's what's being alleged.
In fact, he gave a tour of the White House
after the interview. He it was just a casual meeting
as far as he was concerned. I listen, guys, I'm

(39:16):
going to tell you something. If they treat little old
Sean Hannity like this, maybe I expected you know, this
is a this is an American hero, a three store general. Absolutely,
this is a guy was setting up a guy that
served his country for thirty three years. What is going
on here? They didn't even whether it was the details
of this until seven months after the interview. I mean,

(39:39):
how do you do how do you have an interview
like this with the FBI? And then they did not
even turn in the what the interview consisted of until
August and the interview. But there's a problem with well,
hang on and I'll tell you this is a great
piece that was put out by the federalists today. But
call me. In the latest interview with frank Out, he said, oh, yeah,

(40:01):
I think I probably did look at that three h two,
but he was gone in maya, twenty seventeen. And then
the struck page memos refer to a three O two
with an F in front of it, which probably means Flynn.
And so they're caught red hand. That means that it
was either destroyed or altered to me one or the other.
Pick pick your poison, Louis, Well, it sure looks like

(40:24):
it was altered or maybe redone and they got rid
of evidence that was there. But under the law the
case of Brady, you have to disclose exculpatory evidence, and
there are all kinds of exculpatory things here that it
appears not only did they not disclose it to the
defense but they actually hit it, much like they did

(40:47):
in some other matters we dealt with. But let me
tell you though, whether it's Sean Hannity or a decorated hero,
of course you're my hero too, Shoan. But but they'm
not know what General Flynn. Well, hang on, they made
this guy Sella's freaking house. This is ridiculous. Because he's

(41:07):
a target, they have to give you your rights, and
clearly General Flynn was a target. They were coming after him.
They're required to read him the rights. And when your
target read the rights, they didn't do do that. They
were setting him up. And I don't know what Judge
Sulivan or rule. I know what I would rule. This

(41:27):
is such an outrage. Well, and Louis, if I can
add to that, I mean, you're exactly right. He was
not even allowed to have an attorney in this interview.
And the double standard is glaring. When they interviewed Hillary Clint,
she had what nine attorneys in there with with her
when she was interviewed by the FBI. But here she
was not even allowed them to anyone. Yeah, she had

(41:49):
witnesses with her too, Yeah, us they never allow witness
to be in with another witness's testimony. They did that
with Hillary. Well, I'm to tell you something here. It's
now beginning to come together. There have been rumors of this.
I have heard for well over a year, year and
a half. John Solomon has heard them. Greg Jarrett has

(42:14):
heard them. Sarah Carter has heard them. You know, we've
discussed it. But this seems to now be the smoking
gun here that we now have. And what do you
both make of the special counsel that they hired struck
in page find out that these two are politically, you know,
the ones that exonerated Hillary. He was writing the exoneration

(42:34):
before he ever interviewed her. Then he races to the
Russia investigation. He's the one saying, well, the one hundred
million of zero Hillary should win. And so Mueller gets
rid of them quietly. Then these phones are white clean?
How conveniently? Yes? And you know the answer. Mueller wanted
people that we're going to treat the Trump administration and

(42:55):
anybody that was close to him very unfairly. He knew
Weisman's record and you've talked about this more than anybody.
Sean Weissman destroyed thousands and thousands of lives in a case.
That wasn't even a crime knocked down nine zero, and
Mueller knew that he doesn't care as long as he
could destroy these lives. This is a really serious I

(43:17):
think I wanted one of the few people that said,
why would he ever hire a guy that lost tens
of thousands of jobs lost in the Enron investigation. He
has been cited and excoriated on the issue of exculpatory
evidence read license to Lie. I mean, it's chock full
of information about Mueller's pit bull, just like Jeanie ray
is at the Michael Khne sentence thing that she'd worked

(43:39):
for the Clinton Foundation. I think I'm the only one
that I've been saying, Um, can we not find one
Republican here? Oh Mueller is a Republican? I don't think so.
And you know, all of these guys are best buddies together,
And I don't know what to think if this is
how our top officials now have acted. I don't I

(44:00):
don't even know if there's any hope Jody heis Sean.
I'll just say I'm thrilled that finally, at least there's
a glimmer of hope that Judge Sullivan is going to
hold Muller accountable. Uh, this has been long overdue, and
it appears that at least we have the possible possibility,
the potential of that taking place. Well, he got Muller

(44:21):
got away with destroying Ted Stevens life. I'm hoping that
Sullivan won't let him get away with destroying that. It
wasn't well, I don't think it was Muller in the
Ted Stevens case. Wasn't he was the FBI director. Well,
he wasn't the pro he was. He involved in the
prosecution because because they went after six specific teap of
the deal Ja, the whistle blower to be fired and

(44:44):
the one that engaged in the set up the fraud. Uh.
She went on to do great things from there, you know,
and I mean better jobs rather. But it also brings
back to mind the meeting with Rose Ginstein is sitting
there and most of the media, not you, but most
of the media. Was he kidding when he said he

(45:06):
where while? Or was he not kidding? That was not
the point of that. The point of that is that
you had high DOJ officials sitting around conspiring to take
down a duly elected president. Believable, whether he was kidding
or not. All right, stay stay there. I gotta take
a break more with Jody Heist, Louie Gomer. Then we'll
get our legal experts and Greg Jared David shown on
the same issues. All right, rolling along Sean Hannity's show.

(45:29):
Congressman Louie Gomer, Texas Representative Jody Heist, I think I
said Virginia earlier. I apologize it as Georgia. You should
have corrected me, Congressman. You should have just tell Hannity
or an idiot it's okay. I can deal with that.
Louis tells me that all the time. All right, So
we have a possibility. The President said, you're either going
to fund the border wall if the government and I'll

(45:50):
own it. The government shuts down, now there's a myth.
There's no such thing as a real government shutdown. And
by the way, I'll even speak out for those people
that do get a furlough. I want them to get
their back pay. They shouldn't be victims and all of this.
But national security is what's at stake here, Louis. And
even if the Defense Department, which said that they will
fund this and get this done, I'm cool with that too. Yep, yep,

(46:13):
and if you go back to last spring, the President
made clear that you know this people coming across our
southern border illegally has become a national emergency, and especially
with this invasion caravan, it is a national emergency. And
you know, we lost just over fifty thousand precious lives

(46:34):
in all those years of Vietnam, and one year we
lost over seventy thousand people to drug overdoses, mainly from Mexico.
So it is a national emergency. And in a national emergency,
he can use the military. Well, it's a national security
issue within the standing of the Defense Department. Real quick,
we'll have about twenty seconds for Jody, Yeah, Sean, exactly right.

(46:58):
It is a national security shoe. What amazes me how anyone, anyone,
even the Democrats, could not be in favor of securing
our borders, and it has improven over and over and over.
A wall helps protect our borders. And it's time for
us to deliver what we promise to the American people
and let's get the wall built. Hopefully we'll be able
to get that done this next week. All right, guys,

(47:19):
thank you both, Jody, Georgia, Merry Christmas, Louie gomert A
good friend from Texas. We'll take a quick break the
legal side, Greg Jarrett, David Schona coming up when we
get back next We also look, there's a lot of
news about the Wall that we're going to get to.
There is this debate over whether or not the Defense
Department confund it. Now, if we have drug trafficking, human trafficking,

(47:43):
and terrorists crossing the borders, tell me how that doesn't
fit under the banner of national security in the Defense
Department to keep the American people safe. To me, it does,
especially in light of well we now known that suspected terrorists,
teen of them have been apprehended recently. That's only the
ones we know about, on top of all the other

(48:05):
crimes that have been committed. Not buying me at all
a matter of fact, not even the vast majority. But
we have a right to protect our borders. This is
a moment that we may not get back. Do it now,
fight for something that's what the American people need and want.
I had a question for you. So let's just say
my boyfriend was a dreamer, but he's registered to vote.

(48:26):
He just needs his ID, right, Huh, that's it. So
long as he's registered. Yeah, Okay, yeah, yeah, I just
ask you a question. I went back and we went
and grabbed his driver's license. He's just he's saying something
about how some people are questioning whether it's legal since
he's not a citizen, but he was able to register
if he's if he if he had only need if

(48:48):
he's right, Yeah, it doesn't matter that he's not as
sicit as now or if he's registered, if he had
the honey, it might not be that he's raised. If
he's gay, you all this joble, it may not be. No,
he is registered, he should able to us. He's got
it with him. We ran home and grabbed his driver's
license because he's a doctor recipient, so he was able

(49:10):
to get a driver's license. He's saying he saw some
mess on the internet saying that it's not legal for
him to vote since he's not Someone said on the internet,
I don't know, pant Yeah, Noma, we have dreamers voting, right.
If he has a motivated district your car, he's right,

(49:31):
he has an idea drop his right. Okay, Texas, I
think a pan right, we get up here, that's a
ide join to them and then he can vote. Oh Pa,
I just said a question because my so let's say
my boyfriend's out in the car. Yeah, and um, he's

(49:54):
just really nervous because he's a doctor recipient. He was
able to register though he in the system. Uh no,
he is in the system, but he knows that. Like,
I don't know, there's like an issue with DOCCA people voting. Um,
I don't know yet. I got a lot of them. Okay,
early voter. We have tons of doctor voters. Okay, all right,

(50:18):
we'll do. He just needs his ID but all right,
and it doesn't matter. That's okay. I'm sure to vote.
And got my girlfriends too. She has her license, but
she's like a doctor recipient. Okay, so I mean like
she'll be good. She would be good. She has right

(50:38):
d M, but she does have no I don't think
she's like has been fully possed as a citizen, but
like she does have right d's in oppressive getting right. Yeah,
like she she's not a citizen yet, but yeah, but
you know, yeah, there's still good. Oh wait, don't try. Okay,
then I think she would. I just bring it them,
just bring Yeah. So it actually says I actually okay

(51:01):
cool because also my her mom and her she she
also has the ID to they have the ID so
the sit of Texas, there's no her discrimination against that.
We don't actually verify. Man, I'm gonna make a statement, yeah,
notot not tending who to vote for? A miracle is
at a dark age, right, Yeah, I agree. Yeah, he

(51:26):
is the one that you like recommend. I'm gonna say it,
but don't come telling me he told me no. But
things right now. The Demo has a better ball for
you and for me. But think about how the country
we gain we do Rick in the country's door. He's
doing that. Well. I hope it's gonna change soon, gonna

(51:47):
change it. If you don't vote right then it's going
that way. Yeah, all right, I'll be back. Thank you.
Though I'm not like supers. Yeah, kundrdly Democrat, That's what
I mean. And I vote. I think your name is James,

(52:14):
hey doing, My name is James. Nice to me, good
to see you. Did you know that it was unlawful
to um give your your advice and who to vote for? Yeah? Okay,
you do know that's illegal? Right? Yeah, okay, give a
noid you're talking about that lady eth No, the young
man that came in here earlier. Yeah, yeah, yeah, but

(52:36):
I told him I can be telling him that he
told him that. Okay, all right, did you tell that
young man though, that he voted Democratic all the way
and you know you didn't say that. No, Oh you
didn't say that. No, I ain't called okay, he was
telling me. He was telling me that he votes he

(52:56):
didn't want to vote for Trump, telling me back, yeah,
and I said, if you don't do just voting away, Look,
you don't care, I say, you vollow all Democrats if
you don't want to. I didn't say that. Yeah. Oh,
that's called electioneering. That's the illegue all about. You know
what difference does it make? All right? Twenty three now
till the top of the hour. And before that, you

(53:18):
heard a Texas voting official telling, yeah, Project Veritas undercover
reporter that, oh, non citizens can vote, and then another
poll worker admitting, we don't check for that, We don't
check for citizenship. Oh yeah, it's fine, don't we We
have loads of people like that. Well to bring them in,
don't hurt you about it? Nonsense? Fine. Um, Now, if

(53:40):
we go back and look at this election, um, I
don't think there's any doubt that The undercover work done
by Project Veritas had an impact on this election, as
they got undercover video of Tennessee Senate candidate former governor.
At one point the polls were very tight in Tennessee,
Phil reticent until that Project Veritas tape came out exposing

(54:04):
him as being a phony. Then we had Claire McCaskill
being exposed as being a phony, and Heidi hi Camp
being exposed as being a phony, and Andrew Gillam and
Kristen Cinema. Of all those races, I think they had
a major impact on the outcome because it made massive,
huge news and there's been I guess some ramifications for

(54:27):
James O'Keeffe. These are the newest developments that he has,
mister O'Keeffe, Project Veritas, how are you, sir, founder, Hey Sean,
Great to be with you again. Thank you for having
me well. I do believe this had a big impact
in a lot of these states because we played it
nationally and I did notice a lot of local pickup,
which means the people in these individual states. I mean,

(54:49):
you exposed a lot of people to a lot of
phoniness and they were all contrived, but yeah, you got
them all on tape. I think you got everybody you
know wondering what just hit them. Yep, Sean, this was
a campaign across the country. We had a lot of
recruits that we had worked with and hired over the
last two years, some of whom, by the way, came

(55:10):
to us from your radio show. I was on there
two years ago saying come apply to work for Project
Veritas as an undercover journalists. And by the way, if
I was young, I would want to do this. This
would be fun for me. I would really enjoy undercover
work like this. Well, it takes a certain type of person.
You have to be curious and enterprising and have initiative

(55:31):
and have at acting skill and political skill, but you
have to have a sense for justice. You really have
to believe that there are wrongs like voter fraud the
media will not report on and some people shan come
construction workers, school teachers, nurses, just normal everyday heroes that
decide to do something about it. And Sean, in this
election mcclare, McCaskill, Gillam, we had exposed I mean, the

(55:55):
difference between how they projected themselves in public versus who
they were in private. These election officials, you just played
on the air. They're all telling people who to vote
for in Georgia, which is a misdemeanor. And in Texas
they're saying DACA illegals vote all the time, is what
they told us. So it was an extraordinary election season,
and I think people are waking up to see the

(56:16):
power of video, just how powerful the truth, just showing
people who is the fallout be, because there's always fallout
and aftermath for Project Veritas after stuff like this. And
I did read that there were some people looking to
bring legal action against you, which by the way, is
just a means I think of trying to stop you
from doing the work you're doing. Sean. They I mean
going back to the two years ago, to the videos

(56:38):
did on Creamer where they were inciting violence at Trump rallies,
that guy Creamer is suing us for bogut things, for
intrusion and trespass and tortious interference. They're coming after us.
They're trying to use litigation as a weapon to silence
us and to stop us, and to send a message
to everyone out there that if you expose them, then

(57:01):
they're going to come after you. Two they did it
to David de Lydon. They're doing it to me. I've
got twelve lawsuits against me. I'm being deposed, I'm in depositions.
By the way, we did have a victory real quick.
We did take it all the way to the federal
court in Massachusetts on the recording law and it's declared unconstitutional.
So we defeated them in federal court this week. But Sean,
there's a bigger issue that these people think they can

(57:24):
use lawsuits to stop us, and they want to try
to make a lesson out of me, and in response,
I have no choice but to make a lesson out
of them. They have awakened a sleeping giant. You've got
how many people listen to your show, twenty thirty million
people out there listening, okay, And whether it's in your car,
whether it's on your iPhone, I Heart radio, wherever, and
you're thinking to yourself, I want to have purpose in

(57:46):
my life and make a difference. I want to expose them.
I want to do this. Maybe I even have access
to some things that are happening and I want to
do something about it. If that's you, you should think
of joining our crusade. You should think about signing up
to be a journalist, because journalism is an activity citizens

(58:07):
now need to do it, not just the mainstream press.
All right, so are you actually recruiting people now? I mean,
do you? Or is this a job opening here telling
us about or what I'm telling you that last time,
one of the times they want on your program, there
was a person inside a Silicon tech I'm not going
to tell you which company was. This person came to me.
She is a fan of yours, She was a listener
of yours, and she worked her one of these companies.

(58:29):
And she wrote to me and said, the things I
find this company down in a quota, the things I
find this company doing are so appalling. I feel the
public has a right to know. Project Dartas just gave
me the courage to do the right thing, even if
it meant sacrificing free food and my high salary at
the company. She now works for Project Veritas full time

(58:51):
documenting what has happened, and we're going to go public
with it soon. My point is there are people out
there who feel they want to make a difference in life,
who feel like they should be exposing the corruption, in
the fraud in our government, in our voting system, in
these technompanies and you can do something about it. Just
go to Project Veritas dot com and send me a note,
and I will recruit you. I will pay you a

(59:12):
full time salary so that you can do this, because, Sean,
we have to fight back. They have awakened a sleeping giant.
We have an invisible army of people out there. I'm
just we've understand look on a legal basis, and I
know you have an army of attorneys, so I'm not
really I'm sure it's expensive, and I'm sure that makes
it difficult, and I'm sure it's time consuming to sit
through deposition after deposition, but I do believe this is

(59:37):
important work. And you do dot every eye and cross
every tea, and you are fully aware of what the
laws are in these states. Correct, one party, two party
accord states like, for example, you would not have been
able to do this or might have been questionable if
you were in California. Correct. Well, Sean, we just and
we didn't do it in Massachusetts, which is a state

(59:58):
you're reperfencing. But just to show you that enormous will
and the sort of moral courage of our attorneys, this
is a pretty historic victory. For the First Amendment. We
got the statute in Massachusetts overturned in federal court on
the grounds it's unconstitutional. We have really good lawyers. I mean,
this wasn't the New York Times, it wasn't the Washington
Post that changed the law under the First This was

(01:00:18):
Project Ritas. This is the new Frontier. You can't expect
these journalists. By the way, Sixty Minutes used to do
this all the time. Shows did this all the time
news programs over the years of Sean. They don't want
to actually expose what's really going on these days because
it contradicts their policy positions if they expose the truth.
So they won't do it. But the people out there can.

(01:00:40):
And to answer your question, we never break the law.
We wouldn't ever dream of doing anything that broke the law.
Some people have. We don't do that, But that doesn't
mean that the people out there listening to this program,
and if you feel compelled to live a life of
purpose to actually document and expose this stuff, you should
still contact us and we will talk to you and
we will try to put you to work. By the way,

(01:01:02):
watch out for liberal infiltrators. They're going to try and
do it jiu jitsu. Move on you as my first guest,
All right, James O'Keefe, founder Project Veritas. These new tapes
are unbelievable. We're linking them now to Hannity dot com.
Their website has them all in full, Project Veritas dot com.
I believe these are big, big campaign issues. Now. If

(01:01:22):
they're going to fight back by going after you and
bringing you and dragging you into lawsuits, what happens from there, well, Sean,
I mean, we can never settle the lawsuits. Bob Kreamer
is suing us, He's going around to get other people
to sue us. They're trying to make a lesson out
of me to send a message to patriots if you
do this, if you expose them. So what I have
to do is take a stand and never settle. I

(01:01:44):
did nothing wrong. I was doing my job as a reporter.
It's my first amendment. Right. We got the Supreme Court
rather the Federal Court to overturn the statute in Massachusetts,
and I just want to awaken a sleeping giant army
of exposers. They can take down one man, but they
can't take down us all. James Daymore gave Google a
black eye. You can do that too. If you're on

(01:02:05):
the inside and you see something, let's reverse George orwell
and let's make them afraid. Let's report on their abuses.
That's what the future of Project Viratas is, to engage
a citizen army. So where can people either you know,
write you, call you if they want to do this,
because I bet there will be people, but I would
tell you, and this is my advice. I'd also bet

(01:02:25):
people on the left, I'm going to try and penetrate
your organization. Well, we have a we have a very
sean we have a very professional, dedicated group of employees
at Project Viratas. We have we have many people that
work with me who make sure that the people that
come through our website. You go to Project Raitas dot com.
If you if you're on the radio right now and
you're hearing that's me. I want to do that. I

(01:02:46):
want to serve a purpose, to expose that. Go to
our website Project Veritas, Project veritas dot com and apply
and submit a tip and tell us who you are
and why you want to do this, and we'll put
you through our our system and we will we will
find the people who are meant to do this because
we have to create an army of exposures. They have

(01:03:06):
awakened a sleeping giant, and again, Sean, they're going to
try to make an example out of me. In response,
we're going to make an example out of them. We're
going to make them know that we're watching them and
if you're lying, cheating, or stealing, you may become the
next unwilling Internet celebrity at Project Veritas. All right, James o'kaye,
Project veritas dot com, thank you, sir for being with us,