August 21, 2025 • 31 mins
In today's episode, we dive deep into the latest revelations surrounding the deep state and the ongoing investigations into James Comey. Senator Tom Cotton joins us to discuss the significant reforms announced by Tulsi Gabbard for the Office of Director of National Intelligence, aimed at streamlining and refocusing our intelligence community. We also uncover the shocking evidence that suggests Comey himself authorized classified leaks to influence the 2016 election. Plus, we tackle the double standards in our justice system as it relates to the Biden administration and the ongoing attempts to undermine Donald Trump. Don't miss this explosive discussion!
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):
All right, News round up and Information Overload hour. Here's
(00:02):
our toll free telephone number if you want to be
a part of the program. We welcome back Senator Tom Cotton.
He released a statement on the Director of National Intelligence
TULSEI Gabbard's announcement. He said, Congress created the Office of
Director of National Intelligence to be a lean organization that
(00:23):
used small staffs to coordinate across the intelligence community execute
specific important tasks. And today's announcement, remember earlier in the
week shoes on Hannity and they took away thirty seven
security clearances, number one and number two. They're cutting back
the size and scope of what the organization is because
they've gotten away from their original intent. He said, it
(00:46):
will make the dn I stronger, more effective for national
security for the President. I look forward to working with
Director Gabbard to implement these reforms and provide the ODNI
with legislative relief necessary to ensure our intelligence community can
focus on its core mission, and that is stealing secrets
(01:07):
from our adversaries. Anyway, Senator Cotton, great to have you back.
Thank you for being with us. A lot of news
that is unfolding as it relates to the Deep State.
John Solomon will be with us at the bottom of
the hour, and his report on James Comy is very
breathtaking in terms of they have smoking gun evidence according
to John, that in fact, there were purposeful leaks of
(01:31):
classified information to reporters coming from Comy directly himself. He's
going to lay out the case. He's got all the documents,
he put him up on his website. And then of
course we have James Comer today finding out that, you know,
with the most informative interview of his probe so far
into this conspiracy that he only met twice, meaning Ian
(01:51):
Sam's who testified today, only met twice with Biden. But
he was saying, oh, it's a conspiracy theory if you
dare talk about his cognitive state. And Mike Howell pras
And of the Oversight Project is pointing out that Biden's
own Justice Department was warning directly that these last minute
of pardons and commutations were not going to be legal,
(02:11):
and he lists four specific reasons why, and nobody paid
attention to them. And on top of that, the FBI
director Cash Pattel said there was no constitutional basis, no
lawful predicate for Biden's Justice Department and FBI to carry
out the rate at mar A Lago. There's a lot
going on. Everything that we had been reporting on seems
(02:32):
to be, you know, more and more evidence is coming
out every day that it was all true. Your reaction
all of it sean.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
There certainly had a lot going on in this front,
and I think it's important that the Democratic politicians and
the bureaucrats who perpetuated the Russia collusion hoax are being
exposed and will be held accountable. Some of them, it
seems like, from what I've learned, may be held criminally
accountable in certain cases. But we also have the important
(02:59):
reforms that Tulsa Gabbard announced this week. The d and
I has grown bloated and bureaucratic from its original intent
of Congress twenty years ago. This is something she and
I discussed in our first conversation after President Trump nominated her.
We both addressed her confirmation hearings and at my committee.
The Intelligence Committee passed legislation to help implement a couple
(03:21):
months ago that expect to pass Congress later this year.
I mean, the D and I does not collect intelligence,
They don't have agents running around the world. They don't
have satellites. They're supposed to be a coordinating function. They're
not supposed to be involved in politicizing intelligence, really giving
directives on how agencies use their own internal assets. But
(03:42):
when you have as many people as the D and
I has had in recent years, it does open up
the possibility of mishift making. When people don't have legitimate
intelligence functions and responsibilities on the plate, then they start
cooking up the kind of things that justify their jobs
and their budgets and so forth. So what Director Gabbard
announced this week is an important first step. We've been
working with her closely. Some of the problems with the
(04:04):
D and I, I'll confess, Sean, there's the problems of
Congress over the last twenty years imposing new mandates on them,
creating centers that are superfluous or not related to intelligence
at all. And it's going to take our legislation to
eliminate those offices and those centers so that D and
I can get back to its original focus of ensuring
that intelligence is coordinated across all the agencies while letting
(04:26):
those agencies do their primary job.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
What do you make of Tulsea's declassification and what we
learned as it relates to the twenty sixteen election. And
I asked her the other night on TV, I said, so,
is it your assessment that what happened in twenty sixteen
is that deep state actors tried to use phony information
(04:51):
about a Russia connection to Donald Trump that they knew
didn't exist, so that it would help teller he win
the election. And do you believe that after they lost
the election and senior career intelligence officials ascertained with their
intelligence analysis that there was no Trump Russia collusion and
that Obama and his top lieutenants didn't like that assessment,
(05:13):
and they came up with a new assessment that said
just the opposite, And then they used the dirty Russian
disinformation dossier that was bought and paid for by Hillary
to write a new assessment to make Donald Trump look bad.
What do you make of all of that? Is that
criminal to you?
Speaker 2 (05:29):
Sean? From what Telsea Gabbers released and as well what
John Ratcliff at the CIA is released, and that comes
from senior career intelligence officials at the CIA, it appears
that this rock came from the Democratic political appointees. In fact,
one of the batches of releases from the d and
I about a month ago showed that you had career
(05:51):
officials who are pushing back against Jim Clapper and against
John Brennan and against Jim Comey, saying they shouldn't proceed.
So in some ways, it's the intelligence officials that were
trying to protect the reputation and integrity of their own
work and their agencies against these democratic political appointees. I
(06:12):
think that's what took a lot of people, or what
struck a lot of people, is that it really started
at the top. And it seems that Sean had frankly
gone all the way up to the very top with
Barack Obama in the transition period of twenty sixteen and
twenty seventeen, and it's proven out by FBI investigation and
with the Department of Justice prosecutors, and any of these
(06:32):
people were involved in violating the law, then certainly if
the statue of limitations has not run, then they would
face criminal liability as they should for engaging in criminal misconduct.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Well, I mean, when you think of all of that,
and then you factor in if in fact we have
deep state powerful actors that are used in the intelligence community,
and what should be the greatest law enforcement agency in
the entire world, the FBI, and they're putting cinder blocks
on the scales of elections. I would argue they did
(07:04):
the same thing in twenty twenty because the FBI knew
that Rudy Giuliani's attorney, Bob Costello, had a copy of
Hunter Biden's laptop. They knew that story would break. They
verified the authenticity of the laptop in March of twenty twenty.
They went about the process in the summer of twenty
twenty of meeting with big tech companies every single week,
(07:27):
warning them they may be victims of a disinformation campaign.
It may be about Hunter, it may be about Joe Biden.
And then sure enough the story breaks and Mark Zuckerberg
of Meta, then Facebook, and Jack Dorsey of then Twitter,
you know, call and say, is this what you were
warning us about? And they would not tell them what
they knew to be true, that it was authentic, that
(07:49):
it was real, that they had verified. Such is that
putting cinder blocks on the scale of an election.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
It certainly sounds like a Sean And it is really
important that we get to the bottom of all this,
that all appropriate material is declassified and released. Because it's
not enough just to have people like Pambondi and Cash
Betel in charge now and be confident that this is
not going to happen again, at least for the next
three and a half years. It really is necessary to
(08:16):
expose what happened and hold those people to account, even
if let's say a statute imitations has exposed, hold them
publicly to account so it never happens again. So no
unelected bureaucrat or no democratic appointee in the future thinks
that they can use law enforcement or intelligence agencies to
influence domestic politics here in America.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
It's pretty unbelievable. And you know now that we're learning
from Cash Battel that the FBI rate on Marl Lago.
Literally he determined that it was illegal, and he said,
now's the time for accountability, said there was no constitutional basis,
no lawful predicgated for it. And then, of course, on
one of the top stories of the day, the President
(09:00):
now celebrating his victory over the you know, over Letitia
James and this ridiculous settlement of five hundred and fifteen
million dollars as it you know, relates to a mortgage
case which is unprecedented, and a judge that you know,
stood by evaluation of mar a lago of eighteen million
(09:20):
dollars when it's when it's a billion to a billion
and a half dollars. And they got away with all
of that, and all of the other law fair the
novel legal theory of Alvin Bragg, the rate of mar
A Lago, all of these things combined. I mean to me,
that's more election interference. That's more that their job then
was to bloody up Donald Trump, to make him, you know,
(09:42):
not to make render him not a viable candidate for president.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
Of my view, you got se sean to borrow fraise
from our democratic friends. It sounds to me like a
threat to democracy. And it's so funny that they always
levy that charge against President Trump and against us, when
they're the ones who, again, over the last ten years,
have rapidly used law enforcements and litigation to try to
(10:08):
tar Donald Trump, to try to convict him and imprison
him for the rest of his life, or in the
case that was just overturned today, to find him a
half billion dollars for what Shawan taking out loans that
he repaid. I remember when that judgment first came down
last year. I was talking to a farmer in Arkansas
and he's like, what are they even talking about up there?
You take out a loan, you repay it all. Who's
(10:28):
the victim? I bet the banks are happy, And they
weren't happy, of course.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
Well that was the case. I mean it was in
the case of the non disclosure agreement. It was a
legal non disclosure agreement. It was put together by a lawyer.
It was labeled the legal expense. The statute of limitations
had run out. It was a misdemeanor to begin with
in the state of New York, even though the statute
of limitations had run out. And then to come up
(10:53):
with this novel legal theory and then send the third
highest ranking DOJ official from the Biden Justice Department to
help out. Alvin Bragg tells me they wanted that conviction
as badly again, to bloody of Trump and render him unelectable.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Yeah. Now, fortunately Sean at backfired on them. But again
it's just an example of how they need to be
exposed so this never happens again. LISTA. You know they
had a legal theory that gussied up what was a
misdemeanor into a family. They never even adequately explained the
legal theory. The liberal judge that presided over this case
and allowed the conviction to go forward, or allowed the
case to go to a jury at all, never explained
(11:29):
the legal theory period. They would were willing to break
any rule, any procedure, any custom, all an effort to
get Trump to bankrupt him, to convict him, to imprison them.
Thank goodness, the American people saw through it all and
did not allow it to influence their choice in the
election last year.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
All right, quick break, we'll come back more with Senator
Tom Cotton, Great State of Arkansas as we continue with him,
and then John Solomon is breaking news regarding James Comey
and the leaking of intelligence and information classified information. He
feels he has smoking gun evidence. He'll share that with
us at the bottom of the hour. Well, full coverage
(12:07):
of all of this on Hannity tonight on the Fox
News Channel. Quick Break right back will continue, probably continue
now with Senator Tom Cotton, Great State of Arkansas's with us.
You know, a lot of people listening to this show
will think back and they'll remember investigations that we've had.
You know, Hillary Clinton's dirty bought and paid for dossier.
James call me protecting Hillary with you know, no reasonable
(12:30):
prosecutor would prosecute. But then, of course a double standard
occurred when mar Lago got raided and she did not
have the protections that Donald Trump did with the with
the Presidential Authorization Act, where he had access to these papers,
she never had the ability to take them with her.
The same with Joe Biden. Again, a double standard, a
(12:52):
dual justice system. And I just wonder, you know, and
I know my audience is wondering because everybody I talked
who says, do you think something's going to happen this time?
Are people really going to be held accountable for what
they've done here?
Speaker 2 (13:05):
Shawn, I am because I have confidence in Cash detail
in Pam Bondy to follow the law and to not
break the rules the Democrats did while being aggressive within
the law. And SHAWNA, I predict that if charges are
brought against any of these thirty Democratic players, and they
happen to happen to involve the charges that are so
(13:26):
often been broughtienst Republicans over the past several decades, lying
to Congress, lying the federal investigators, substruction of justice. You're
going to hear wailing and crying from Democrats and from
liberals in the media about how this happens all the time,
and these are not serious actions and they're engaged in
legal warfare. When it's aok against Donald Trump or for
(13:47):
that matter, against Ronald Reagan's appointees or against George W.
Bush's appointees, it was all fine and dandy back then,
and it was a matter of high principle. But when
it's going when the shoes on the other foot and
Democrats are being held accountable for things like lying to
federal investigators or obstruction of justice or conspiracy against civil rights,
then all of a sudden, those charges are not going
(14:08):
to be serious at all in the case where everyone
does it and Donald Trump's doj under Pam Mandy and
Cash Retail is engaging in that ragious misconduct conduct. Just
mark mark my work, Sean when you hear that. But
I'm confident that Pam and Cash, if there are legal
legal case to be made and it's colorable under the
law and under precedent, will move forward to hold these
people accountable.
Speaker 1 (14:28):
It is amazing that these you know all this information
that they didn't get rid of it. These burn bags
they left them there. This information, this paper trail, they
left it there. They're supposed to be so clever and
so smart, you would think they would have covered their
own tracks. But the discoveries that they're making every day,
you know, I'll frankly take my breath away. And as
(14:49):
somebody who reported on all of these issues, I spent
you know, four years of my life reporting on Russia, Russia, Russia,
and even stands beyond that it is, it is kind
of breathtaking. But Senator Tom Cott, we always appreciate you
being with us. Thank you, sir. Eight hundred nine four
one Shawn. If you want to be a part of
(15:09):
the program, I'm twenty five now till the top of
the hour. Eight hundred and ninety four one. Shawn is
on number. You want to be a part of the program, Hey,
I want everybody to go to legacybox dot com slash
Hannity today. You're gonna get fifty percent off your box.
They're gonna send you a box, and you take your time.
You do it on your own time. You're gonna go
into your attic, you go into your basement, your closets,
(15:30):
your garage and have other family members do the same thing.
You want every family memory. You spend so much time.
Babies are born, baby's first steps, babies first day at school,
baby's first holy communion, graduations, weddings, you name it. You
capture all of these moments on ham quarter tapes, VHS tapes,
(15:51):
film reels. You know you have negatives, you have photos
and they are literally rotting away because the heat, moisture,
and mold. Well, thanks to Legacy Box, they will hand
digitize all of these family memories in perpetuity, which means
you're great great great great great great great grandchildren. One
will know what you look like and sounded like, which
is great for them. And maybe relatives that have passed away,
(16:14):
maybe their pictures will be preserved in perpetuity and maybe
you'll get to hear from Grandma, Grandpa. Maybe they passed away,
You'll get to hear from them again and see them again.
It will be an incredible experience for you and your family.
These memories were taken not to be hidden away in
some attic somewhere, so anyway, get your Legacy Box today.
(16:35):
Go to legacy box dot com. Slash Annity unllocked fifty
percent off your order today, send it in at your convenience,
and it'll be a gift you can give your entire
family and they're gonna love it. We welcome back the founder,
editor in chief, chief investigative reporter Justinnews dot com, John Solomon.
(16:57):
I will tell you, in the last three four weeks
he has been on a tear breaking one big story
after another. I brought up a lot of news earlier,
not the least of which is the President scoring that
massive legal victory as an appeals court tossed out that
ridiculous half a billion dollar judgment that New York Attorney
(17:18):
General Letitia James and Judge Ertuwan, who still to this
day thinks mar A Lago's just worth a mere eighteen
million when it's well over a billion dollars. The FBI
director Cash Bettel has determined the Biden FBI's mar A
Lago raid was illegal. As I said earlier in the program,
(17:38):
you have a top Justice Department prosecutor hinting that the
New York Attorney General could avoid prosecution on mortgage fraud charges.
Interesting investigations going on between her and Adam Schiff and
Adam Shifts. By the way, you know, last minute pardon
may be brought into question as well the President going
(18:00):
out and you know on on patrol in DC, if
you will, Pam Bondi will join us tonight on Hannity
to talk about that part. But we just have breaking
at this moment on top of all of the news
we've had today, John Solomon, I'm just looking at this report.
Prosecutors have secured evidence about James Comy, mister higher honor
(18:23):
himself that he authorized classified leagues, but what they declined charges.
And I'll let John tell you the story himself, because
he did all the deep digging and hard work and
he found all the evidence, and it looks like we
have bombshell revelations from all I can see here.
Speaker 3 (18:40):
John, Yeah, this is a very big moment. This is
one of the deepest, darkest secrets that have been locked
up in the vaults of the FBI and the Justice Department.
Into the credit of Cash Btel, who dug these documents
up and got them, and then to the credit of
Pam Bondi, the Attorney General, who worked hard to lift
redactions heavily were adacted documents. We now know for certain
(19:04):
that federal prosecutors ascertained evidence from the top lieutenants of
James Comy that James Comy had leaked classified authorized the
leak of classified information to The New York Times. One
of those leaks right before the election, clearly a leak
designed to influence the election in twenty sixteen. And I
(19:24):
want to remind everybody to a famous moment right around
the time that President Trump fired James Combe as the
FBI director, he was brought before the Senate Judiciary Committee
and Chuck Grassley pinned James Comy down. He was asked
by by Chuck Grassey, did you ever have you ever
(19:46):
been in an anonymous source of news reports and matters relating
to the Trump investigation of the Clinton investigation? He answered never.
Grassy then said did you ever authorize anyone else to
be an anonymous source on these topics? He said no,
and whether? And then he was asked us any cast
of information relating to President Trumper's associates ever declassified or
shared with journalists and Comby said not to my knowledge.
(20:08):
In fact, he went out to say, I think leaks
are a problem. Well, let's tell you what. The Postal
Inspection Service and federal prosecutors found when they looked at
that testimony and looked at a very specific leak to
the New York Times. They concluded that based on eyewitness
testimony from James Baker, the former chief counsel to James
(20:28):
Comy at the FBI, Baker admitted he disclosed US government
classified information to the New York Times, and he did
so because he had been instructed and authorized to do
so by then FBI Director James Comy, and he lays
out how the instruction came down. Comy tells his cheapestaff
James Rabicki, James Rebake tells Baker go leak it, and
(20:49):
then Baker goes leaks it to the New York Times.
That seems to directly contradict, directly contradict the testimony of
James Comy in seventeen something that's well outside the statute
of limitations. But what isn't outside the statute of limitations
is a knowing and willful and intentional leak of national
security information. There are certain statutes in certain conditions where
(21:13):
someone can be charged up to ten years after a
classified leak if it's knowing in wilfold. Certainly, what Baker
and Roubickie are talking about is comy knowing what he
was doing and having people downstream from him do the
dirty work. This is a bombshell. It is big. It's
in FBI documents. We just put the documents up on
our website. Everybody can read them with their own eyes. Now,
(21:35):
what did we learn about why we didn't get accountability
before this? It turns out that multiple people looked at this,
including the US Attorney's office in Washington, d C. Under
Donald Trump's first term, and the former Special Prosecutor John Durman.
In both cases, they decided not to bring criminal charges
even though they had this pretty clear case of a
(21:56):
leak and an admission of a leak and who was
involved and who approved it. We're gonna have a lot
of fall up peop were going to wonder why did
that happen? Who made those decisions in Is there anything
Pam BONDI can do now to resurrect this case and
bring justice. You'll get a chance, I guess to ask
her about it tonight on your show.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
Well, let me ask you to answer your own question.
I mean, the obvious answer would be yes, if the
statute of limitations have not run out, if you purposely
are leaking classified information and you're saying the smoking of
gun evidence and it's in writing.
Speaker 3 (22:29):
It is in writing. Yeah. The US Postal Inspection Service
was brought in to assist this investigation since the FBI
couldn't investigate itself. It is clear in this summary memo
that the investigation established that James Baker did leak the
information that James Coomy, through James or VICKI told him
to do it. Now they decided not to charge Baker
(22:53):
and Vicky, the two top lieutenants, but it is silent
on the issue of why the authorizer himself, James Comey,
wasn't considered for charges. I think that's something we got
to do more work on. It's gonna take us some time.
There are still some redactions in these documents. There's still
some classified information that we can't see. There will be
(23:13):
lots of things that will, but there is a portion
of the Internal Security Act of nineteen fifty that does
extend a statute out to ten years. The things we
have to know which we can't tell from this is
what was exactly the classified piece of information. Is there
any scenario where James Comby could be classify it himself
or did someone above him, Did a Barack Obama or
(23:34):
a James Brennan or John Brennan or someone else tell
him to leak the information? We don't know that from
these memos, but we do know one thing. There was
pretty darn good evidence to say James Commey didn't tell
Congress the truth and there was a classified leak that
occurred in his inner circle, reportedly in these documents, flatly
stating James Comy himself approved that leak.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
What do you make I mean when you put all
all of this together, and for example, what Tulsey Gabbard
was able to declassify. We learned, for example, that senior
career intelligence officials had determined that there was no Trump
Russia collusion. That was an early day. They concluded that
after the twenty sixteen election, we could backtrack a little
(24:20):
bit and we could say, okay, there was no real
reason why James Comey stepped up and said no reasonable
prosecutor would prosecute, knowing the evidence was very overwhelming and
incontrovertible as it relates to Hillary Clinton having top secret
classified information on our servers in an attempt to cover
it up by using bleach bit to acid wash the
(24:42):
servers and destroying devices with hammers and removing sim cards.
Then James Comy's involvement. He signed three of the four
FISA warrants, even though correct me if my timeline is wrong,
even though he was wrong. He was warned in August
of twenty sixteen not to use the dirty Russian disinformation
dossier that Hillary paid for, which became the bulk of
(25:04):
information for the four PISA warrants, and they definitively knew
not to use it by December of twenty sixteen, and
James Comy was responsible for putting his signature on the
first three PISA warrants. And there is a law, as
Greg Jared has pointed out many many times, that says,
if you give false information to a PHIZA court and
(25:27):
you discover it immediately, your job is to go back
to the court and tell them the information that you
had presented to the court turned out to be false.
They didn't do that. It seems like there's a lot
of legal vulnerability for James Comy. So maybe when I
said back in twenty sixteen, seventeen and eighteen, and we're
doing Russia, Russia, Russia every day, and you are such
(25:47):
a big part of the coverage. I said, James Komy,
just remember you have the right to remain silent. Maybe
I wasn't so wrong.
Speaker 3 (25:54):
Yeah, man, maybe you should listened to a few more
Taylor Swift songs and maybe not done so many leaks.
We'll see, Yeah, listen. I think today is a day
to take a pause and realize how much the steel
curtain that kept us from understanding the weaponization machinery has broken,
and particularly in just the last few weeks, but certainly
over the last three or four years. We now know
(26:15):
that the verdict against President Trump in the civil case
was unconstitutional. We knew it, but now we have a
court saying it. We know that there were massive leaks.
We know the intelligence community hijacked an assessment and tried
to come to a false collusion to carry out a
political outcome. We know that Hillary Clinton authorized the whole
Russia collusion hoax, and that the FBI knew in advance,
(26:38):
and so did President Obama, that she had authorized this
dirty trick. Instill The FBI and the US Intelligence Committee
participated in that dirty trick, legitimized that dirty trick dragged
the country through three and a half years of unnecessary
turmoil over a scandal that never had as John Durham
told us, and I owed of evidence to back it up.
(26:58):
And now we know that we had a group of leakers,
people in high senior positions who looked in the eye
and told us we could trust them, who were leaking information.
And those include, according to the evidence that the FBI
believed it had, Adam shiff the chairman of the House
Intelligence Committee, James Comy, the FBI Director. We may have
others before we're done, based on what I'm seeing in
(27:20):
these memos. So the great steel curtain that hid all
of this from us has crumbled, and the only question
left for us is will there be a prosecution or
a penalty so powerful that it creates an incentive for
future people not to do this. Right now, there's no deterrence.
So many people got away with the things we've now chronicled.
(27:41):
If I'm sitting and I'm a deep Stater who has
political motives, I might not be afraid to do something
similar in the future. That is the moment that Pam
Bondi at cash Ptel, that Tulci Gabbett, that President Trump
have on their plate right now, they could create a
deterrence to make sure they make an example of a
few people, created an enormous penalty, could very well see
(28:01):
the sort of deterrence.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
Well, let me ask you this, is there three presidential elections,
John Solomon, in which we have deep state actors abusing
their power to try to influence elections in this country.
That would be the Grand conspiracy investigation. To me may
sound complicated, but it's really not.
Speaker 3 (28:22):
It's not because it's a very simple pattern obstruct lawful
criminal investigations of Democrats who may have done something wrong.
Hillary Clinton with their classified emails, Hillary Clinton with their foundation,
Hunter Biden with his taxes, Hunter Biden with his corruption,
Joe Biden with his classified documents. Those were the three
(28:42):
major investigations that were Democrats that enormous liability, and they
got a pass, and they occurred and could have infected
the twenty sixteen, the twenty twenty and the twenty twenty
four election. What happened on the other side of that equation,
Donald Trump was pursued almost always on fall or incomplete
allegations for things like Russia collusion, Ukraine impeachment, classified documents
(29:08):
in the raid on Mr Lago, and so the case
is very simple, as complicated as all the facts are
in the timeline is it's very simple a wash rint
repeat cycle of protecting and obstructing an investigation of a
Democrat so that they don't get in trouble, then projecting
a fake scandal or a questionable scandal on a Republican
(29:28):
and so doing you're obstructing justice and the Democrats investigation,
and then you're violating the civil liberties of the Republicans
who are falsely accused and put through a process. I
think that is what we heard, Tay. Remember what the
federal the New York Appeals Court ruled today, what Judge
Edjeron and what Letitia James did wasn't just an error.
(29:49):
It was a violation of the eighth Amendment of the
US Constitution. Is a civil liberties a civil rights violation.
That is the theory that Caspitel opened up this case,
and that's the theory that Harmeet Dylan talked about on
my show the other day. The people now about the
face criminal investigation could be charged with crimes under the
(30:10):
same civil rights laws that we use to prosecute crooked
cops and dirty cops in the South. In the nineteen
sixties who were violating the rights of black Americans in
the South. Those laws could very come around, and it
can very much come around if used in this conspiracy case.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
John Solomon justinews dot com. All these documents are available
just toews dot com Founder, editor in chief, chief investigative reporter.
We'll have more on this breaking news tonight on Hannity. Also,
James Calmer will be on. Pam Bondi will be on.
We're going to get to the bottom of it in
a way that nobody else in the media will. John,
great work, You've been on fire lately. We appreciate you sharing.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
It with us. Thank you so good to be spending
time with you.
Speaker 1 (30:50):
Eight hundred nine four one shown us on number if
you want to be a part of the program. Right
that's going to wrap things up with today All star
lineup tonight on Hannity, Pam Bondi, The ag My Governor,
Grande aunt is, John Solomon, Alina Habbad, James Comer and
Joe Concha the e DVR Hannity tonight, nine Eastern on Fox.
Will see you then back here tomorrow. Thank you for
making this show possible.
All right, News round up and Information Overload hour. Here's
(00:02):
our toll free telephone number if you want to be
a part of the program. We welcome back Senator Tom Cotton.
He released a statement on the Director of National Intelligence
TULSEI Gabbard's announcement. He said, Congress created the Office of
Director of National Intelligence to be a lean organization that
(00:23):
used small staffs to coordinate across the intelligence community execute
specific important tasks. And today's announcement, remember earlier in the
week shoes on Hannity and they took away thirty seven
security clearances, number one and number two. They're cutting back
the size and scope of what the organization is because
they've gotten away from their original intent. He said, it
(00:46):
will make the dn I stronger, more effective for national
security for the President. I look forward to working with
Director Gabbard to implement these reforms and provide the ODNI
with legislative relief necessary to ensure our intelligence community can
focus on its core mission, and that is stealing secrets
(01:07):
from our adversaries. Anyway, Senator Cotton, great to have you back.
Thank you for being with us. A lot of news
that is unfolding as it relates to the Deep State.
John Solomon will be with us at the bottom of
the hour, and his report on James Comy is very
breathtaking in terms of they have smoking gun evidence according
to John, that in fact, there were purposeful leaks of
(01:31):
classified information to reporters coming from Comy directly himself. He's
going to lay out the case. He's got all the documents,
he put him up on his website. And then of
course we have James Comer today finding out that, you know,
with the most informative interview of his probe so far
into this conspiracy that he only met twice, meaning Ian
(01:51):
Sam's who testified today, only met twice with Biden. But
he was saying, oh, it's a conspiracy theory if you
dare talk about his cognitive state. And Mike Howell pras
And of the Oversight Project is pointing out that Biden's
own Justice Department was warning directly that these last minute
of pardons and commutations were not going to be legal,
(02:11):
and he lists four specific reasons why, and nobody paid
attention to them. And on top of that, the FBI
director Cash Pattel said there was no constitutional basis, no
lawful predicate for Biden's Justice Department and FBI to carry
out the rate at mar A Lago. There's a lot
going on. Everything that we had been reporting on seems
(02:32):
to be, you know, more and more evidence is coming
out every day that it was all true. Your reaction
all of it sean.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
There certainly had a lot going on in this front,
and I think it's important that the Democratic politicians and
the bureaucrats who perpetuated the Russia collusion hoax are being
exposed and will be held accountable. Some of them, it
seems like, from what I've learned, may be held criminally
accountable in certain cases. But we also have the important
(02:59):
reforms that Tulsa Gabbard announced this week. The d and
I has grown bloated and bureaucratic from its original intent
of Congress twenty years ago. This is something she and
I discussed in our first conversation after President Trump nominated her.
We both addressed her confirmation hearings and at my committee.
The Intelligence Committee passed legislation to help implement a couple
(03:21):
months ago that expect to pass Congress later this year.
I mean, the D and I does not collect intelligence,
They don't have agents running around the world. They don't
have satellites. They're supposed to be a coordinating function. They're
not supposed to be involved in politicizing intelligence, really giving
directives on how agencies use their own internal assets. But
(03:42):
when you have as many people as the D and
I has had in recent years, it does open up
the possibility of mishift making. When people don't have legitimate
intelligence functions and responsibilities on the plate, then they start
cooking up the kind of things that justify their jobs
and their budgets and so forth. So what Director Gabbard
announced this week is an important first step. We've been
working with her closely. Some of the problems with the
(04:04):
D and I, I'll confess, Sean, there's the problems of
Congress over the last twenty years imposing new mandates on them,
creating centers that are superfluous or not related to intelligence
at all. And it's going to take our legislation to
eliminate those offices and those centers so that D and
I can get back to its original focus of ensuring
that intelligence is coordinated across all the agencies while letting
(04:26):
those agencies do their primary job.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
What do you make of Tulsea's declassification and what we
learned as it relates to the twenty sixteen election. And
I asked her the other night on TV, I said, so,
is it your assessment that what happened in twenty sixteen
is that deep state actors tried to use phony information
(04:51):
about a Russia connection to Donald Trump that they knew
didn't exist, so that it would help teller he win
the election. And do you believe that after they lost
the election and senior career intelligence officials ascertained with their
intelligence analysis that there was no Trump Russia collusion and
that Obama and his top lieutenants didn't like that assessment,
(05:13):
and they came up with a new assessment that said
just the opposite, And then they used the dirty Russian
disinformation dossier that was bought and paid for by Hillary
to write a new assessment to make Donald Trump look bad.
What do you make of all of that? Is that
criminal to you?
Speaker 2 (05:29):
Sean? From what Telsea Gabbers released and as well what
John Ratcliff at the CIA is released, and that comes
from senior career intelligence officials at the CIA, it appears
that this rock came from the Democratic political appointees. In fact,
one of the batches of releases from the d and
I about a month ago showed that you had career
(05:51):
officials who are pushing back against Jim Clapper and against
John Brennan and against Jim Comey, saying they shouldn't proceed.
So in some ways, it's the intelligence officials that were
trying to protect the reputation and integrity of their own
work and their agencies against these democratic political appointees. I
(06:12):
think that's what took a lot of people, or what
struck a lot of people, is that it really started
at the top. And it seems that Sean had frankly
gone all the way up to the very top with
Barack Obama in the transition period of twenty sixteen and
twenty seventeen, and it's proven out by FBI investigation and
with the Department of Justice prosecutors, and any of these
(06:32):
people were involved in violating the law, then certainly if
the statue of limitations has not run, then they would
face criminal liability as they should for engaging in criminal misconduct.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Well, I mean, when you think of all of that,
and then you factor in if in fact we have
deep state powerful actors that are used in the intelligence community,
and what should be the greatest law enforcement agency in
the entire world, the FBI, and they're putting cinder blocks
on the scales of elections. I would argue they did
(07:04):
the same thing in twenty twenty because the FBI knew
that Rudy Giuliani's attorney, Bob Costello, had a copy of
Hunter Biden's laptop. They knew that story would break. They
verified the authenticity of the laptop in March of twenty twenty.
They went about the process in the summer of twenty
twenty of meeting with big tech companies every single week,
(07:27):
warning them they may be victims of a disinformation campaign.
It may be about Hunter, it may be about Joe Biden.
And then sure enough the story breaks and Mark Zuckerberg
of Meta, then Facebook, and Jack Dorsey of then Twitter,
you know, call and say, is this what you were
warning us about? And they would not tell them what
they knew to be true, that it was authentic, that
(07:49):
it was real, that they had verified. Such is that
putting cinder blocks on the scale of an election.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
It certainly sounds like a Sean And it is really
important that we get to the bottom of all this,
that all appropriate material is declassified and released. Because it's
not enough just to have people like Pambondi and Cash
Betel in charge now and be confident that this is
not going to happen again, at least for the next
three and a half years. It really is necessary to
(08:16):
expose what happened and hold those people to account, even
if let's say a statute imitations has exposed, hold them
publicly to account so it never happens again. So no
unelected bureaucrat or no democratic appointee in the future thinks
that they can use law enforcement or intelligence agencies to
influence domestic politics here in America.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
It's pretty unbelievable. And you know now that we're learning
from Cash Battel that the FBI rate on Marl Lago.
Literally he determined that it was illegal, and he said,
now's the time for accountability, said there was no constitutional basis,
no lawful predicgated for it. And then, of course, on
one of the top stories of the day, the President
(09:00):
now celebrating his victory over the you know, over Letitia
James and this ridiculous settlement of five hundred and fifteen
million dollars as it you know, relates to a mortgage
case which is unprecedented, and a judge that you know,
stood by evaluation of mar a lago of eighteen million
(09:20):
dollars when it's when it's a billion to a billion
and a half dollars. And they got away with all
of that, and all of the other law fair the
novel legal theory of Alvin Bragg, the rate of mar
A Lago, all of these things combined. I mean to me,
that's more election interference. That's more that their job then
was to bloody up Donald Trump, to make him, you know,
(09:42):
not to make render him not a viable candidate for president.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
Of my view, you got se sean to borrow fraise
from our democratic friends. It sounds to me like a
threat to democracy. And it's so funny that they always
levy that charge against President Trump and against us, when
they're the ones who, again, over the last ten years,
have rapidly used law enforcements and litigation to try to
(10:08):
tar Donald Trump, to try to convict him and imprison
him for the rest of his life, or in the
case that was just overturned today, to find him a
half billion dollars for what Shawan taking out loans that
he repaid. I remember when that judgment first came down
last year. I was talking to a farmer in Arkansas
and he's like, what are they even talking about up there?
You take out a loan, you repay it all. Who's
(10:28):
the victim? I bet the banks are happy, And they
weren't happy, of course.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
Well that was the case. I mean it was in
the case of the non disclosure agreement. It was a
legal non disclosure agreement. It was put together by a lawyer.
It was labeled the legal expense. The statute of limitations
had run out. It was a misdemeanor to begin with
in the state of New York, even though the statute
of limitations had run out. And then to come up
(10:53):
with this novel legal theory and then send the third
highest ranking DOJ official from the Biden Justice Department to
help out. Alvin Bragg tells me they wanted that conviction
as badly again, to bloody of Trump and render him unelectable.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Yeah. Now, fortunately Sean at backfired on them. But again
it's just an example of how they need to be
exposed so this never happens again. LISTA. You know they
had a legal theory that gussied up what was a
misdemeanor into a family. They never even adequately explained the
legal theory. The liberal judge that presided over this case
and allowed the conviction to go forward, or allowed the
case to go to a jury at all, never explained
(11:29):
the legal theory period. They would were willing to break
any rule, any procedure, any custom, all an effort to
get Trump to bankrupt him, to convict him, to imprison them.
Thank goodness, the American people saw through it all and
did not allow it to influence their choice in the
election last year.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
All right, quick break, we'll come back more with Senator
Tom Cotton, Great State of Arkansas as we continue with him,
and then John Solomon is breaking news regarding James Comey
and the leaking of intelligence and information classified information. He
feels he has smoking gun evidence. He'll share that with
us at the bottom of the hour. Well, full coverage
(12:07):
of all of this on Hannity tonight on the Fox
News Channel. Quick Break right back will continue, probably continue
now with Senator Tom Cotton, Great State of Arkansas's with us.
You know, a lot of people listening to this show
will think back and they'll remember investigations that we've had.
You know, Hillary Clinton's dirty bought and paid for dossier.
James call me protecting Hillary with you know, no reasonable
(12:30):
prosecutor would prosecute. But then, of course a double standard
occurred when mar Lago got raided and she did not
have the protections that Donald Trump did with the with
the Presidential Authorization Act, where he had access to these papers,
she never had the ability to take them with her.
The same with Joe Biden. Again, a double standard, a
(12:52):
dual justice system. And I just wonder, you know, and
I know my audience is wondering because everybody I talked
who says, do you think something's going to happen this time?
Are people really going to be held accountable for what
they've done here?
Speaker 2 (13:05):
Shawn, I am because I have confidence in Cash detail
in Pam Bondy to follow the law and to not
break the rules the Democrats did while being aggressive within
the law. And SHAWNA, I predict that if charges are
brought against any of these thirty Democratic players, and they
happen to happen to involve the charges that are so
(13:26):
often been broughtienst Republicans over the past several decades, lying
to Congress, lying the federal investigators, substruction of justice. You're
going to hear wailing and crying from Democrats and from
liberals in the media about how this happens all the time,
and these are not serious actions and they're engaged in
legal warfare. When it's aok against Donald Trump or for
(13:47):
that matter, against Ronald Reagan's appointees or against George W.
Bush's appointees, it was all fine and dandy back then,
and it was a matter of high principle. But when
it's going when the shoes on the other foot and
Democrats are being held accountable for things like lying to
federal investigators or obstruction of justice or conspiracy against civil rights,
then all of a sudden, those charges are not going
(14:08):
to be serious at all in the case where everyone
does it and Donald Trump's doj under Pam Mandy and
Cash Retail is engaging in that ragious misconduct conduct. Just
mark mark my work, Sean when you hear that. But
I'm confident that Pam and Cash, if there are legal
legal case to be made and it's colorable under the
law and under precedent, will move forward to hold these
people accountable.
Speaker 1 (14:28):
It is amazing that these you know all this information
that they didn't get rid of it. These burn bags
they left them there. This information, this paper trail, they
left it there. They're supposed to be so clever and
so smart, you would think they would have covered their
own tracks. But the discoveries that they're making every day,
you know, I'll frankly take my breath away. And as
(14:49):
somebody who reported on all of these issues, I spent
you know, four years of my life reporting on Russia, Russia, Russia,
and even stands beyond that it is, it is kind
of breathtaking. But Senator Tom Cott, we always appreciate you
being with us. Thank you, sir. Eight hundred nine four
one Shawn. If you want to be a part of
(15:09):
the program, I'm twenty five now till the top of
the hour. Eight hundred and ninety four one. Shawn is
on number. You want to be a part of the program, Hey,
I want everybody to go to legacybox dot com slash
Hannity today. You're gonna get fifty percent off your box.
They're gonna send you a box, and you take your time.
You do it on your own time. You're gonna go
into your attic, you go into your basement, your closets,
(15:30):
your garage and have other family members do the same thing.
You want every family memory. You spend so much time.
Babies are born, baby's first steps, babies first day at school,
baby's first holy communion, graduations, weddings, you name it. You
capture all of these moments on ham quarter tapes, VHS tapes,
(15:51):
film reels. You know you have negatives, you have photos
and they are literally rotting away because the heat, moisture,
and mold. Well, thanks to Legacy Box, they will hand
digitize all of these family memories in perpetuity, which means
you're great great great great great great great grandchildren. One
will know what you look like and sounded like, which
is great for them. And maybe relatives that have passed away,
(16:14):
maybe their pictures will be preserved in perpetuity and maybe
you'll get to hear from Grandma, Grandpa. Maybe they passed away,
You'll get to hear from them again and see them again.
It will be an incredible experience for you and your family.
These memories were taken not to be hidden away in
some attic somewhere, so anyway, get your Legacy Box today.
(16:35):
Go to legacy box dot com. Slash Annity unllocked fifty
percent off your order today, send it in at your convenience,
and it'll be a gift you can give your entire
family and they're gonna love it. We welcome back the founder,
editor in chief, chief investigative reporter Justinnews dot com, John Solomon.
(16:57):
I will tell you, in the last three four weeks
he has been on a tear breaking one big story
after another. I brought up a lot of news earlier,
not the least of which is the President scoring that
massive legal victory as an appeals court tossed out that
ridiculous half a billion dollar judgment that New York Attorney
(17:18):
General Letitia James and Judge Ertuwan, who still to this
day thinks mar A Lago's just worth a mere eighteen
million when it's well over a billion dollars. The FBI
director Cash Bettel has determined the Biden FBI's mar A
Lago raid was illegal. As I said earlier in the program,
(17:38):
you have a top Justice Department prosecutor hinting that the
New York Attorney General could avoid prosecution on mortgage fraud charges.
Interesting investigations going on between her and Adam Schiff and
Adam Shifts. By the way, you know, last minute pardon
may be brought into question as well the President going
(18:00):
out and you know on on patrol in DC, if
you will, Pam Bondi will join us tonight on Hannity
to talk about that part. But we just have breaking
at this moment on top of all of the news
we've had today, John Solomon, I'm just looking at this report.
Prosecutors have secured evidence about James Comy, mister higher honor
(18:23):
himself that he authorized classified leagues, but what they declined charges.
And I'll let John tell you the story himself, because
he did all the deep digging and hard work and
he found all the evidence, and it looks like we
have bombshell revelations from all I can see here.
Speaker 3 (18:40):
John, Yeah, this is a very big moment. This is
one of the deepest, darkest secrets that have been locked
up in the vaults of the FBI and the Justice Department.
Into the credit of Cash Btel, who dug these documents
up and got them, and then to the credit of
Pam Bondi, the Attorney General, who worked hard to lift
redactions heavily were adacted documents. We now know for certain
(19:04):
that federal prosecutors ascertained evidence from the top lieutenants of
James Comy that James Comy had leaked classified authorized the
leak of classified information to The New York Times. One
of those leaks right before the election, clearly a leak
designed to influence the election in twenty sixteen. And I
(19:24):
want to remind everybody to a famous moment right around
the time that President Trump fired James Combe as the
FBI director, he was brought before the Senate Judiciary Committee
and Chuck Grassley pinned James Comy down. He was asked
by by Chuck Grassey, did you ever have you ever
(19:46):
been in an anonymous source of news reports and matters relating
to the Trump investigation of the Clinton investigation? He answered never.
Grassy then said did you ever authorize anyone else to
be an anonymous source on these topics? He said no,
and whether? And then he was asked us any cast
of information relating to President Trumper's associates ever declassified or
shared with journalists and Comby said not to my knowledge.
(20:08):
In fact, he went out to say, I think leaks
are a problem. Well, let's tell you what. The Postal
Inspection Service and federal prosecutors found when they looked at
that testimony and looked at a very specific leak to
the New York Times. They concluded that based on eyewitness
testimony from James Baker, the former chief counsel to James
(20:28):
Comy at the FBI, Baker admitted he disclosed US government
classified information to the New York Times, and he did
so because he had been instructed and authorized to do
so by then FBI Director James Comy, and he lays
out how the instruction came down. Comy tells his cheapestaff
James Rabicki, James Rebake tells Baker go leak it, and
(20:49):
then Baker goes leaks it to the New York Times.
That seems to directly contradict, directly contradict the testimony of
James Comy in seventeen something that's well outside the statute
of limitations. But what isn't outside the statute of limitations
is a knowing and willful and intentional leak of national
security information. There are certain statutes in certain conditions where
(21:13):
someone can be charged up to ten years after a
classified leak if it's knowing in wilfold. Certainly, what Baker
and Roubickie are talking about is comy knowing what he
was doing and having people downstream from him do the
dirty work. This is a bombshell. It is big. It's
in FBI documents. We just put the documents up on
our website. Everybody can read them with their own eyes. Now,
(21:35):
what did we learn about why we didn't get accountability
before this? It turns out that multiple people looked at this,
including the US Attorney's office in Washington, d C. Under
Donald Trump's first term, and the former Special Prosecutor John Durman.
In both cases, they decided not to bring criminal charges
even though they had this pretty clear case of a
(21:56):
leak and an admission of a leak and who was
involved and who approved it. We're gonna have a lot
of fall up peop were going to wonder why did
that happen? Who made those decisions in Is there anything
Pam BONDI can do now to resurrect this case and
bring justice. You'll get a chance, I guess to ask
her about it tonight on your show.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
Well, let me ask you to answer your own question.
I mean, the obvious answer would be yes, if the
statute of limitations have not run out, if you purposely
are leaking classified information and you're saying the smoking of
gun evidence and it's in writing.
Speaker 3 (22:29):
It is in writing. Yeah. The US Postal Inspection Service
was brought in to assist this investigation since the FBI
couldn't investigate itself. It is clear in this summary memo
that the investigation established that James Baker did leak the
information that James Coomy, through James or VICKI told him
to do it. Now they decided not to charge Baker
(22:53):
and Vicky, the two top lieutenants, but it is silent
on the issue of why the authorizer himself, James Comey,
wasn't considered for charges. I think that's something we got
to do more work on. It's gonna take us some time.
There are still some redactions in these documents. There's still
some classified information that we can't see. There will be
(23:13):
lots of things that will, but there is a portion
of the Internal Security Act of nineteen fifty that does
extend a statute out to ten years. The things we
have to know which we can't tell from this is
what was exactly the classified piece of information. Is there
any scenario where James Comby could be classify it himself
or did someone above him, Did a Barack Obama or
(23:34):
a James Brennan or John Brennan or someone else tell
him to leak the information? We don't know that from
these memos, but we do know one thing. There was
pretty darn good evidence to say James Commey didn't tell
Congress the truth and there was a classified leak that
occurred in his inner circle, reportedly in these documents, flatly
stating James Comy himself approved that leak.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
What do you make I mean when you put all
all of this together, and for example, what Tulsey Gabbard
was able to declassify. We learned, for example, that senior
career intelligence officials had determined that there was no Trump
Russia collusion. That was an early day. They concluded that
after the twenty sixteen election, we could backtrack a little
(24:20):
bit and we could say, okay, there was no real
reason why James Comey stepped up and said no reasonable
prosecutor would prosecute, knowing the evidence was very overwhelming and
incontrovertible as it relates to Hillary Clinton having top secret
classified information on our servers in an attempt to cover
it up by using bleach bit to acid wash the
(24:42):
servers and destroying devices with hammers and removing sim cards.
Then James Comy's involvement. He signed three of the four
FISA warrants, even though correct me if my timeline is wrong,
even though he was wrong. He was warned in August
of twenty sixteen not to use the dirty Russian disinformation
dossier that Hillary paid for, which became the bulk of
(25:04):
information for the four PISA warrants, and they definitively knew
not to use it by December of twenty sixteen, and
James Comy was responsible for putting his signature on the
first three PISA warrants. And there is a law, as
Greg Jared has pointed out many many times, that says,
if you give false information to a PHIZA court and
(25:27):
you discover it immediately, your job is to go back
to the court and tell them the information that you
had presented to the court turned out to be false.
They didn't do that. It seems like there's a lot
of legal vulnerability for James Comy. So maybe when I
said back in twenty sixteen, seventeen and eighteen, and we're
doing Russia, Russia, Russia every day, and you are such
(25:47):
a big part of the coverage. I said, James Komy,
just remember you have the right to remain silent. Maybe
I wasn't so wrong.
Speaker 3 (25:54):
Yeah, man, maybe you should listened to a few more
Taylor Swift songs and maybe not done so many leaks.
We'll see, Yeah, listen. I think today is a day
to take a pause and realize how much the steel
curtain that kept us from understanding the weaponization machinery has broken,
and particularly in just the last few weeks, but certainly
over the last three or four years. We now know
(26:15):
that the verdict against President Trump in the civil case
was unconstitutional. We knew it, but now we have a
court saying it. We know that there were massive leaks.
We know the intelligence community hijacked an assessment and tried
to come to a false collusion to carry out a
political outcome. We know that Hillary Clinton authorized the whole
Russia collusion hoax, and that the FBI knew in advance,
(26:38):
and so did President Obama, that she had authorized this
dirty trick. Instill The FBI and the US Intelligence Committee
participated in that dirty trick, legitimized that dirty trick dragged
the country through three and a half years of unnecessary
turmoil over a scandal that never had as John Durham
told us, and I owed of evidence to back it up.
(26:58):
And now we know that we had a group of leakers,
people in high senior positions who looked in the eye
and told us we could trust them, who were leaking information.
And those include, according to the evidence that the FBI
believed it had, Adam shiff the chairman of the House
Intelligence Committee, James Comy, the FBI Director. We may have
others before we're done, based on what I'm seeing in
(27:20):
these memos. So the great steel curtain that hid all
of this from us has crumbled, and the only question
left for us is will there be a prosecution or
a penalty so powerful that it creates an incentive for
future people not to do this. Right now, there's no deterrence.
So many people got away with the things we've now chronicled.
(27:41):
If I'm sitting and I'm a deep Stater who has
political motives, I might not be afraid to do something
similar in the future. That is the moment that Pam
Bondi at cash Ptel, that Tulci Gabbett, that President Trump
have on their plate right now, they could create a
deterrence to make sure they make an example of a
few people, created an enormous penalty, could very well see
(28:01):
the sort of deterrence.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
Well, let me ask you this, is there three presidential elections,
John Solomon, in which we have deep state actors abusing
their power to try to influence elections in this country.
That would be the Grand conspiracy investigation. To me may
sound complicated, but it's really not.
Speaker 3 (28:22):
It's not because it's a very simple pattern obstruct lawful
criminal investigations of Democrats who may have done something wrong.
Hillary Clinton with their classified emails, Hillary Clinton with their foundation,
Hunter Biden with his taxes, Hunter Biden with his corruption,
Joe Biden with his classified documents. Those were the three
(28:42):
major investigations that were Democrats that enormous liability, and they
got a pass, and they occurred and could have infected
the twenty sixteen, the twenty twenty and the twenty twenty
four election. What happened on the other side of that equation,
Donald Trump was pursued almost always on fall or incomplete
allegations for things like Russia collusion, Ukraine impeachment, classified documents
(29:08):
in the raid on Mr Lago, and so the case
is very simple, as complicated as all the facts are
in the timeline is it's very simple a wash rint
repeat cycle of protecting and obstructing an investigation of a
Democrat so that they don't get in trouble, then projecting
a fake scandal or a questionable scandal on a Republican
(29:28):
and so doing you're obstructing justice and the Democrats investigation,
and then you're violating the civil liberties of the Republicans
who are falsely accused and put through a process. I
think that is what we heard, Tay. Remember what the
federal the New York Appeals Court ruled today, what Judge
Edjeron and what Letitia James did wasn't just an error.
(29:49):
It was a violation of the eighth Amendment of the
US Constitution. Is a civil liberties a civil rights violation.
That is the theory that Caspitel opened up this case,
and that's the theory that Harmeet Dylan talked about on
my show the other day. The people now about the
face criminal investigation could be charged with crimes under the
(30:10):
same civil rights laws that we use to prosecute crooked
cops and dirty cops in the South. In the nineteen
sixties who were violating the rights of black Americans in
the South. Those laws could very come around, and it
can very much come around if used in this conspiracy case.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
John Solomon justinews dot com. All these documents are available
just toews dot com Founder, editor in chief, chief investigative reporter.
We'll have more on this breaking news tonight on Hannity. Also,
James Calmer will be on. Pam Bondi will be on.
We're going to get to the bottom of it in
a way that nobody else in the media will. John,
great work, You've been on fire lately. We appreciate you sharing.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
It with us. Thank you so good to be spending
time with you.
Speaker 1 (30:50):
Eight hundred nine four one shown us on number if
you want to be a part of the program. Right
that's going to wrap things up with today All star
lineup tonight on Hannity, Pam Bondi, The ag My Governor,
Grande aunt is, John Solomon, Alina Habbad, James Comer and
Joe Concha the e DVR Hannity tonight, nine Eastern on Fox.
Will see you then back here tomorrow. Thank you for
making this show possible.
The Sean Hannity Show News
Host
Sean Hannity
Popular Podcasts
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.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.