July 2, 2025 • 29 mins
On today’s explosive episode, Sean Hannity dives into the shocking outcome of the Sean “Diddy” Combs trial—where graphic video evidence, disturbing allegations of abuse, and decades of elite protection collided in one of the most controversial verdicts in recent memory. As Combs walks on the most serious charges, Hannity and guests question the integrity of the legal system, the silence of the “Me Too” movement, and the cultural rot that rewards celebrity over accountability.
Plus, with Independence Day around the corner, Sean slams the latest Gallup poll showing a record-low number of Americans proud of their country. He contrasts that with the promise of the “One Big Beautiful Bill”—a sweeping package of tax cuts, border security, military modernization, and energy independence. Hannity breaks down why this bill is a chance to restore prosperity and pride, and calls out Republicans who fail to message or fight for what’s in it.
From courtroom outrage to Capitol Hill infighting, this hour is a fiery defense of American values, truth, and the people left behind by elites.
Follow Sean and Our Guests on Social Media:
-
Facebook: facebook.com/SeanHannity
-
X (Twitter): x.com/seanhannity
-
Truth Social: truthsocial.com/@SeanHannity
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, thank you Scott Shannon, and thanks to all
of you for being with us. Right down our toll
free telephone number. You want to be a part of
the program. A lot of issues involving crime out there today.
I understand that that prosecutors when they make plea deals,
like in the case of Coldburger that killed these four
college kids. I don't know, did you have you followed
(00:22):
this case, Linda. This guy was stalking these these kids.
I mean, they had all this videotape of him, you know,
driving past the house repeatedly late at night, pulling in
the driveway. I mean, just crazy stalker, you know, chilling
every parent's worst nightmare kind of stuff. And what bothers
(00:43):
me about it is if part of the plea deal
the families get no closure, no explanation, nothing at all whatsoever.
And I do sympathize with their anger in that case
because I think they do have a right to know,
and certainly not having the death penalty as an option, uh,
I believe they should have been consulted on. Apparently they
were not. And that bothers me too. You follow that
(01:05):
case because I thought it was pretty outrageous. They didn't
even talk to the families. I guess we lost Linda anyway.
But so that's one of the big cases we're following today.
This frustrates me, and that is the Sean Diddy Combs trial,
(01:26):
and it is. It is a pretty shocking verdict on
a lot of levels. I thought the rico was always
rico charge was always going to be be difficult racketeering conspiracy,
but there's also two counts of sex trafficking, two counts
of transportation to engage in prostitution, and he was found
guilty on the two counts of transportation to engage prostitutes.
(01:50):
And that's about it. Now, we had this videotape in
this case, he had a girlfriend, longtime girlfriend, Cassie Ventura,
and we all saw this horrific, chilling, frightening physical assault
on this woman. When he comes down the hall, he's
in like a towel and you know, just beating and
kicking the daylights out of her. Clearly she's trying to
(02:14):
escape and get in an elevator and was unable to
do so. And then there's this other factor's testimony in
the case from a security guard and did he paid
a lot of money to buy what he thought was
the only footage. And then you have this this little
issue of the statute of limitations in the case, which
I believe is about one year in California, only one year.
(02:36):
That's insane and in terms of being able to charge
in this particular case. And I'm like, well, why would
you have a one year statute of limitations in this case?
Speaker 2 (02:49):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
And for a battery felony like this, I don't understand that.
And you know, and by the way, when you drag
somebody back against their will into your apartment, what do
you call that?
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Which is another thought that I have.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
But the most whether you agree or disagree with the verdict,
I mean, it's it's the best system we have I
can think of, as imperfect as it might be at times.
And you do have people to go in dury. Nullification
is real. People have all sorts of other motivations. You
have politics in the courtroom, you have overcharging in some
cases by ambitious prosecutors.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
This was a huge loss.
Speaker 1 (03:25):
And anyway, and the worst part of all of this
is fans of Sean Dinny Combs because he had these
freak offs and all this baby oil apparently that was
used in it and he, like you know, had this
voyeurism rear perversion thing going on, according to testimony. And
these fans outside the courtroom esquirting each other with baby
(03:48):
oil in this celebration where he was acquitted of the
sex trafficking and racketeering charges, the more serious charges. And
you know, you see all these supporters dancing, dancing and disgusting.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
It is disgusting. These people are disgusting, you know what.
I've been here the whole time, and I've been talking
the whole time. And then everybody started saying they couldn't
hear me on the air, so I went to a
different microphone just to make sure.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
Anyway, go aheads here in New York City. I just
whispered in.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
Here, dumb oh, I thought you said something else. Anyways,
my point in all of this is we have an
issue here with you know, no accountability. It's a two
tier system. It's an elitist system. It's absolutely insane, and
this ditty case is no different. We saw him beat
a woman up in a hallway with We've had a
million claims.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
That doesn't make your stomach turn.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
It doesn't exactly she's up there and now she's pregnant
on the stand giving her testimony. Where's all the me
too women? I don't see any of them outside. No,
I see a bunch of.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
Babies there, and people are saying, Wow, she got paid
all those money, et cetera, et cetera. It doesn't matter.
That doesn't take away the criminality. You are not allowed
to beat women, period. End of sentence. And why are
people celebrating and dancing and shouting woo hoo? You know
(05:08):
you have one half naked woman drenched in oil, ripping
off her blue wig and waving it around. This is
all over social media. I guess we'll show it on
TV tonight. But a man in a blue top, you know,
squirting the woman who's only wearing underwear with this with
this baby oil lubrikint, you know, which was notoriously used
(05:30):
by Combs during his long freak off bizarro. You know,
sex parties, according to you know the video you know
that we've seen so far. I mean, it is pretty unbelievable. Now,
he was convicted on two counts of transportation to engage
in prostitution, but you know that's ten years in jail.
(05:51):
This guy was facing life in jail. I thought when
they came to this verdict fast, but they couldn't decide
on the one Rico. I thought for sure it was
going to be gilt.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
Let me tell you something. I'm gonna tell you right now,
and there is no right of what I'm saying. All right,
this is just the way that things go. Somebody got
to somebody because everybody's got a guy, and this guy
had a lot of guys.
Speaker 2 (06:14):
This is your theory without any evidence.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
Hence the reason I just said to you, I have
no proof. Hello. My point in saying this is this
guy is famous, he's disgusting, and he had a lot
of nasty, famous people at his parties, and all those
people want to make sure that their dirty little secrets
never come out. And that's exactly.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
What's interesting, because remember, at the beginning of this trial,
they had the names of all these famous people that
they gave to jurors during jury selection and ask people
whether they recognize those names, and a lot of those
names didn't come up during the trial, or if they
did come up, and they only came up in innocuous ways.
(06:52):
And it sounded to me like if these people were
at the famous white parties, freak off parties, you're going
to tell me that they didn't know.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
What was going on. Testify about what's going on.
Speaker 3 (07:07):
It's happening right now in New York City with little
kids that are being trafficked by sick and disgusting and
perverted people. And because the.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Topic is on New York City, is.
Speaker 3 (07:20):
Just New York City, I'm saying it's everywhere, but we're
talking about New York. So while these people are out
in the streets freaking out with their baby oil, some
little five year old is being subjected to a pedophile
and some party somewhere else with a bunch of disgusting
people that I'm sure a lot of us would know
if we knew their names and we knew they were there.
But somebody got to somebody on that jewelry.
Speaker 1 (07:40):
Well, it's a nice You may be right, I have
no idea. Definitely right. You know that's that's your suspicion.
In theory, I have to be open to anything as possible,
But who knows. I don't want to accuse people of
something that we don't know happened. But I will tell
you this, this guy's a bad guy. And if you
have any doubt about it, look at that video tape.
(08:03):
You know, I honestly I cannot understand the level. And
people say, well, drugs will make you do that, Well,
this will make you do things. There's something so off here,
There's something the whole everything that was described is so
bizarre and weird and strange and perverted. And we're not
(08:26):
protecting women in a case like this, and that's that's
what is so frustrating to me. And it's like the
case of Epstein. Well, where was somebody to step in
and stop what was going on in that case? And
then the other people I don't you know, I don't
understand it.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
We move on.
Speaker 1 (08:44):
We're watching the one big beautiful bill. You know, the
process has begun in the House. I'm going to help
Republicans a little bit here with the caveat that I've
been I've been very clear about I don't like every
aspect of the bill. But you know, politicians, generally speaking,
(09:06):
and I have learned over the years, this is how
they work. They always put their self interest and their
re election. Oftentimes they'll put that above what is right.
And what's frustrating to me is knowing that there are
slim majorities in the House and the Senate and Senate.
The Senate in particular, had these arcane parliamentary procedures to
(09:32):
bypass cloture, which would require sixty votes. They only have
fifty three senators they can use when it comes to
budgetary issues what's called reconciliation. And you don't only need
a simple majority.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (09:47):
It ended up being a fifty to fifty vote, a
marathon session of voter rama, as they call it. And
as I was up not last night, but the night before,
all night checking in with my friends in the Senate,
finding out the latest, the latest, the latest, and two o'clock. No,
they didn't have the votes. Four am, they didn't have
the votes. Five am, they didn't have the votes. Six am,
(10:09):
they didn't have the votes. Eight am. I here, it
looks like they got the votes. And Lisa Mkowski, she
wasn't telling people how she was voting, not getting into
the personality aspect of it. And this is where Republicans
sometimes need to ask themselves, if you want to win reelection,
your focus and priorities to get the economy. Two things
(10:31):
drive elections, peace and prosperity, and both are included in
this bill. If you don't want the argument if they
if they let this opportunity be squandered, that's on them.
I don't think they ultimately will. But they can't change
the Senate version because you have the Senate parliamentarian that
was you know, giving you know, every single line of
(10:53):
once twice and fifteen times over, and there are very
rigid rules that they have to follow in the Senate.
So there were changes and provisions. It's about eighty five
percent of what the House bill was originally, and the
House you know, narrowly passed it there. If they changed
the bill again, it means has to go back to
the Senate. The odds are going to be lower that
(11:14):
it'll pass in the Senate. But this is what you
can if you're a politician, tell your constituents about this bill.
You should be proud of. It is the largest tax
cut in American history. And Democrats and your opponent voted
for the largest tax increase in American history. And you
could tell your constituents that you voted for hard working
(11:38):
American men and women, and you voted for no tax
on tips and no tax on overtime of Social Security.
You can tell them that part and Democrats they wouldn't
stand up for working men and women. You could tell
them you voted to fund and fully build a secure
border wall that will protect our country and that Democrats
(11:59):
still are in face of open borders. You can tell
them that you voted for the funding to depoort criminal
illegal immigrants, and Democrats they are fighting for them to
stay like a Brego Garcia and others. You can tell
your constituents that you voted for lower energy prices because
in this bill are all of the policies the president
(12:22):
needs to bring this country to become, put in place
the foundation for us to be an energy dominant, energy
rich country, and will pay less at the pump that's
in this bill. You can tell your constituents the Democrats,
as always, they don't care about high energy prices. You
(12:42):
can proudly say that you voted for the principle of
peace through strength and modernizing a military that has been
neglected for the last four years by Biden and Harris
and Democrats. They voted for appeasement and they voted for
a week Department of Defense. All things you can tell.
(13:03):
You can tell them you voted for law and order
and safety and security. You can tell them that you
voted for reform, and education which is desperately needed, all
of which is in this bill. Now I understand that
they're you know, for example, I can give a number
of examples of things I don't like. And now the
question is, I understand some people they want perfect. You're
(13:27):
not gonna get perfect in Washington. You want perfect, don't
go into politics because you picked the wrong profession. It's like,
if you want a friend and you go to work
in Washington, the only friend you're going to get is
if you get a puppy dog. Get a dog, because
you're not gonna have a lot of friends in Washington.
Go there to serve your constituents. That is a long
(13:47):
laundry list of good things. And the frustrates me is
when I watch Democrats lie and demogogue this bill. Look
for the billionaires and trillionaires. AOC is saying this. Republicans
telling the truth. They're cutting Medicaid Medica.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
No, they're not.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Increasing spending. They're just getting rid of waste, fraud and abuse,
and putting in you know what Bill Clinton supported, which
is a work requirement. Why don't you get out there
and champion all the good things. There's never been more
conservatism in any one bill, not a perfect bill. Why
did blue states get rewarded with salt deductions, state and
(14:27):
local tax deductions? I hate it, but you know what,
it's not going to be perfect. But you needed that
to get Republicans that live in New York and New
Jersey and California. They desperately needed it because they felt
that they needed to tell their constituents that they got
something special for their states, just rewards electing tax and
spend liberals. Anyway, we marxist, mom, Donnie. Now this was
(14:54):
in the New York Post today.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
I read this. I said, no way, did you read this, Linda, that.
Speaker 1 (15:00):
Mam Dami actually celebrated the anniversary of the Russian Revolution.
Now keep in mind, you know it's mom, Danni, it
is AOC. It was this they know, fight the oligarchy,
Ao season, this is a tax cut for millionaires and
millionaires and trillionaires.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
I'm like, okay, no, it's not.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
They just Democrats just lie, like they lie every two years,
like they lie every four years. You know about Republicans,
and they lie. They're lying about this bill. It reminds
me very reminiscent of the the Congress in ninety six
and when they voted to balance the budget and they
(15:44):
reduced the rad of growth of Medicare, and Democrats Demo
god did but if you recalled, Bill Clinton went along
with new King Rich and then the result was amazing
for the American people. And that was, you know, we
balanced the budget four straight years in a row, and
we got on a path to fiscal sanity.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
They did it two ways.
Speaker 1 (16:04):
They had work for requirements, that is in the one
big beautiful bill. By the way, number two.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
They also reduced the radar growth. That is not a cut,
that is an increase, but a lower increase or reducing
the radar growth because it's unsustainable. You're ready are facing Medicare,
Medicaid and social security. Really we can't afford it. It's
on that we're on the brink of bankruptcy. Anyway, Can
I ask a question?
Speaker 3 (16:33):
Can I just ask a question? It's the elephant in
the room. I would ride the elephant. So Elizabeth McDonough
is the parliamentarian. This is an unelected woman who.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
In the one that worked for al Gore.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
And thank you one, yes sir, that one.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
And the one that was appointed by Harry.
Speaker 1 (16:50):
Reid, Thank you, yes, sir. This person is like any
other information to help make your point.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
Well, no, I'm asking a question. I'm not making a point.
I'm asking a question so she can be fired by
the Senate Majority Leader John fuon Republican.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
Trent Lott fired the Senate parliamentarian when he was the
majority leader.
Speaker 3 (17:11):
Fine, John fun should follow in suit, or the Vice
President can overrule her. I'm trying to figure out what
the purpose is of having control of the House and
Senate if we're not going to exact that authority and
use it. She's putting in credit.
Speaker 2 (17:29):
Listen, I thank you.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
I think you ask a very valid question on many
many of the language issues that she originally brought up,
and I was paying very close attention to it, as
you know, I was up all night two nights ago,
and during that whole process when they first had the
first written version and I saw the story and we
(17:53):
talked about it on the air.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
It made me very nervous. By the way.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
In fairness, it did happen with the with Obamacare. The
Senate Parliamentarian had many objections, and it did happen with
the Inflation Reduction Act that Biden used. They did up
many you know, they did have to change the language
in many cases doesn't make a dimes worth of difference,
but there were some key provisions.
Speaker 2 (18:18):
You're right.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
If I had my way, I would have followed suit
and followed the precedent set by Trent Lott. I don't
think the President asked for it, to be very honest,
and I think had the President pushed it, it probably
would have happened. Like for example, I think there is
a strong case to be made on the issue of
the economy as it relates to Jerome Powell.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
I mean, I'll give you an example. There's a story today.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
The boss of Fanny May, Freddie Mack, claimed on Wednesday
that the Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell could lose his
job over his allegedly deceptive testimony to Congress over the
Central banks lavish two point five billion dollar revamp of
their DC headquarters. Now the Federal Housing Finance Agency director,
(19:06):
this guy, William Poulti, who is also the chairman of
the two US back mortgage lenders, demanded that Powell be
probed by lawmakers and suggested that he could even be
fired by President Trump. Quote, I am asking Congress to
investigate Chairman's her own Powell for his political bias, his
deceptive Senate testimony, which is enough to be removed for cause,
(19:31):
he said in a leak statement obtained by The New
York Post, and Powell's two point five billion dollar building
renovation scandals things to high Heaven, and he said he
lied when he was asked about the specifics before Congress.
This is nothing short of malfeasans, the thirty seven year
old former journalist and private equity titan added, and look,
(19:55):
I think the President was right in that handwritten note
and pointing out, you know, all these countries with all
these lower interest rates, and why why aren't they dropping it?
It's for political reasons, that's all. There's no other reason
inflation is down at imagine manageable rate at their targeted goal,
and there's no reason at all to keep interest rates
(20:17):
high now while most indicators on the economy are firing
on all cylinders, far better than anybody else believed. And
even the doubters, even our friend Steven Moore, very very
skeptical wrote the book trump Bonomics, but very skeptical, skeptical
over Trump's tariff policy and trade policy even on this program,
(20:42):
came back and he said, you know what, Donald Trump
was right, and you know I'm saying on this one
big beautiful bill kind of the same thing.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
Again.
Speaker 1 (20:53):
What frustrates me is these guys don't know how to
message things. If you want the arguments on the House floor,
it is the same demagoguery we get every election year.
It's the same thing we got when nukek Ingrich even
(21:14):
partnered with Bill Clinton, and the result was reducing the
rate of growth for Medicare Medicaid from to seven percent
a year every year for seven years. We had four
straight balanced budgets in a row. They have to eliminate
something called baseline budgeting. Now remember too that we also
(21:35):
have another bite or as many bites as the apple
as we want, and there'll be many opportunities for the
House and Senate to get the cost savings that we need,
in effect, so we stop robbing from our kids and grandkids.
That goal of mine I have stated my entire career,
and I want to get to that. But what frustrates
(21:58):
me about summer Pulicans is they're complaining, they're listening too
much to what the Democrats are saying, even the lies
that are being told.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
You know, this is for billionaires and millionaires. No, it's not.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
The people that benefit the most are hard working Americans
and the working class in this country and people that
are lower middle class, the people that are poor, and
people that are middle class. They are the biggest beneficiaries
of this bill. Now, there are certain business incentives that
(22:35):
you might say, well, hennity, if a business builds out
a warehouse and they have certain tax benefits, they're the
biggest beneficiaries.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Are they really the biggest?
Speaker 1 (22:47):
Because all that is going to do is is poor
gasoline on the economy and accelerate its growth.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
And by that I mean.
Speaker 1 (23:01):
If somebody is going to invest tens of millions of
dollars in a pharmaceutical manufacturing company, a semiconductor manufacturing company,
automobi bial manufacturing company, and they're incentivized to do it faster, well,
that's going to help the building industry, which has been
decimated by Powell and his high interest rates. Nobody's going
(23:24):
to give up a two point nine percent thirty year
fixed rate mortgage for a seven percent or seven plus
percent thirty year fixed rate mortgage. And he has stifled
the housing market as a result of all of this,
unnecessarily so based on his own words and definitions. You know,
so there are certain things that people aren't talking about,
(23:45):
the fact that they can't defend the largest tax cut
in American history, and they can't go on offense the
Democrats are supporting the largest tax increase in American history.
It's almost like they have no business being politicians. If
you cannot communicate that, you know, if Sean Hannity is
(24:06):
giving you the benefits of your stupid bill, then you're
out of touch the idea that you can't go out
and herald the fact that this is the first time
any party has ever given service workers the benefit of
not taxing tips and other industry, hardworking people the incentive
(24:29):
to work overtime without taxing all their overtime, not taxing
Social Security up to a much higher level than before.
I mean, those are all things that had never happened before.
You know, Democrats aren't standing up for working men and women.
They know Democrats voted again for open borders. They don't
want to fund the border, and this border needs to
(24:52):
be closed, President Trump, and this bill is closing the border.
President Trump is putting aside monies to get rid of
the known terrorists, murderers, rapists, other violent criminals, cartel members,
gang members, and drug dealers. That's in this bill. Democrats
are voting for more open borders. If you can't sell that,
(25:12):
I can't help you. If you can't go out there
and lay out the importance that Republicans in this bill
are ensuring lower energy prices by opening up drilling and
fracking and coal mining, I can't help you, and that
Democrats are fighting for higher energy prices, the lifeblood of
(25:34):
our economy. If you can't go out there and explain
the importance in a very evil and dangerous world of
the US military or Department of Defense needing money for
the next generation of weaponry i e. Punker buster bombs,
new technology, hypersonic missiles, missile defense, the Iron Dome, which
(25:58):
Democrats are not supporting. I can't help them because all
of that is in the bill. And if you can't
go out there and point out that, oh, finally we'll
get rid of the Department of Education, which has failed spectacularly,
take power away from teachers' unions, give more choice to
(26:18):
parents as a good thing, I can't help you. And
I don't hear these people making those arguments, Linda, I
don't hear it. Yeah, okay, point out the three provisions
you don't like. I'll listen to you and probably agree
with you. I'll concede the point. But I also know
with a three margin, you know, vote lead in the
(26:42):
Senate and using the reconciliation process, as bewildering and arcane
as it is, that is about for now, first shot
at it.
Speaker 2 (26:54):
The best you're gonna do.
Speaker 3 (26:56):
I will give you all of this, and I would
agree with you, and you know that I don't agree
with you on this bill. But I had a conversation
with our friend Jeff Lord who worked for Reagan, this morning,
and he enlightened me onto something which is something that
I've thought for quite a while. Now there's them and
there's us, and there's no in between. The right and
left all work together in one big giant club, which
is how do we get it over the finish lines?
(27:17):
We can all get to July fourth. This is how
I really feel the uniparty. Well said, thank you. He
said the same thing.
Speaker 2 (27:24):
You're welcome.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
It basically helps them and not us, And I think
it's a realization that is painful but unfortunately necessary. Having
said that, if they were to put something into the
bill that said, this is what they need to do
to codify the tax cuts and to help us with
some of the things you're talking about, like energy and
things like that, so that they can come back to
the table with the reconciliation to take out all the
(27:45):
woke crap. I would be okay with that. So let
them add the promise so that we actually get to
the other reconciliation to get the crap out of it.
Speaker 1 (27:52):
The problem there's no room for additions after it leaves
the Senate.
Speaker 2 (27:56):
It's it.
Speaker 3 (27:57):
Yeah, well we could if the vice president or the
Senate the majority leader fired at the parliamentarian, then her
bill would be null and void.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
I'll conceded.
Speaker 1 (28:05):
The stated plan is that they are going to, you know,
go back and make some of the do more.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Now, there's an argument to be made. This bill is
too big, and I actually am kind.
Speaker 3 (28:18):
Of nty pages. I bet none of them read the whole.
Speaker 1 (28:21):
Day, Greg Greg, Well, I don't know how they could
miss it. Chucky Schumer made him read it on the
on the Could you.
Speaker 3 (28:27):
Listen to Chucky Schumer for nine hundred and forty pages?
Speaker 1 (28:30):
Come on, Well, thank god it was a clerk, it
wasn't him. Of clerks, and I'm just saying, I'm just
laying out the good parts of it. Now, why is
this imperative?
Speaker 2 (28:39):
Now?
Speaker 1 (28:39):
New Kingrich made the point is you need lead up
time to November twenty six. If you do all these
things for the economy, and you factor in the the
incalculable impact on the economy that energy dominance will have,
and the ten and a half, I'm we have another
(29:01):
it's soon to be another half a trillion dollars in
manufacturing investment and the impact that'll have on the economy.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
And in this notion that people don't understand, you.
Speaker 1 (29:12):
Cut taxes, it increases revenues to the government. Trump proved it.
Reagan doubled revenues in eight years. Oh well, we didn't
factor in the cost of the tax cuts. There is
no cost to tax cuts, you morons. That's supply side
one oh one. That just infuriates me. Republicans don't even
know their own philosophy, never mind articulating it.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
It's I can't stand it. They don't know how to fight.
They had to fight
All right, thank you Scott Shannon, and thanks to all
of you for being with us. Right down our toll
free telephone number. You want to be a part of
the program. A lot of issues involving crime out there today.
I understand that that prosecutors when they make plea deals,
like in the case of Coldburger that killed these four
college kids. I don't know, did you have you followed
(00:22):
this case, Linda. This guy was stalking these these kids.
I mean, they had all this videotape of him, you know,
driving past the house repeatedly late at night, pulling in
the driveway. I mean, just crazy stalker, you know, chilling
every parent's worst nightmare kind of stuff. And what bothers
(00:43):
me about it is if part of the plea deal
the families get no closure, no explanation, nothing at all whatsoever.
And I do sympathize with their anger in that case
because I think they do have a right to know,
and certainly not having the death penalty as an option, uh,
I believe they should have been consulted on. Apparently they
were not. And that bothers me too. You follow that
(01:05):
case because I thought it was pretty outrageous. They didn't
even talk to the families. I guess we lost Linda anyway.
But so that's one of the big cases we're following today.
This frustrates me, and that is the Sean Diddy Combs trial,
(01:26):
and it is. It is a pretty shocking verdict on
a lot of levels. I thought the rico was always
rico charge was always going to be be difficult racketeering conspiracy,
but there's also two counts of sex trafficking, two counts
of transportation to engage in prostitution, and he was found
guilty on the two counts of transportation to engage prostitutes.
(01:50):
And that's about it. Now, we had this videotape in
this case, he had a girlfriend, longtime girlfriend, Cassie Ventura,
and we all saw this horrific, chilling, frightening physical assault
on this woman. When he comes down the hall, he's
in like a towel and you know, just beating and
kicking the daylights out of her. Clearly she's trying to
(02:14):
escape and get in an elevator and was unable to
do so. And then there's this other factor's testimony in
the case from a security guard and did he paid
a lot of money to buy what he thought was
the only footage. And then you have this this little
issue of the statute of limitations in the case, which
I believe is about one year in California, only one year.
(02:36):
That's insane and in terms of being able to charge
in this particular case. And I'm like, well, why would
you have a one year statute of limitations in this case?
Speaker 2 (02:49):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
And for a battery felony like this, I don't understand that.
And you know, and by the way, when you drag
somebody back against their will into your apartment, what do
you call that?
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Which is another thought that I have.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
But the most whether you agree or disagree with the verdict,
I mean, it's it's the best system we have I
can think of, as imperfect as it might be at times.
And you do have people to go in dury. Nullification
is real. People have all sorts of other motivations. You
have politics in the courtroom, you have overcharging in some
cases by ambitious prosecutors.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
This was a huge loss.
Speaker 1 (03:25):
And anyway, and the worst part of all of this
is fans of Sean Dinny Combs because he had these
freak offs and all this baby oil apparently that was
used in it and he, like you know, had this
voyeurism rear perversion thing going on, according to testimony. And
these fans outside the courtroom esquirting each other with baby
(03:48):
oil in this celebration where he was acquitted of the
sex trafficking and racketeering charges, the more serious charges. And
you know, you see all these supporters dancing, dancing and disgusting.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
It is disgusting. These people are disgusting, you know what.
I've been here the whole time, and I've been talking
the whole time. And then everybody started saying they couldn't
hear me on the air, so I went to a
different microphone just to make sure.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
Anyway, go aheads here in New York City. I just
whispered in.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
Here, dumb oh, I thought you said something else. Anyways,
my point in all of this is we have an
issue here with you know, no accountability. It's a two
tier system. It's an elitist system. It's absolutely insane, and
this ditty case is no different. We saw him beat
a woman up in a hallway with We've had a
million claims.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
That doesn't make your stomach turn.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
It doesn't exactly she's up there and now she's pregnant
on the stand giving her testimony. Where's all the me
too women? I don't see any of them outside. No,
I see a bunch of.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
Babies there, and people are saying, Wow, she got paid
all those money, et cetera, et cetera. It doesn't matter.
That doesn't take away the criminality. You are not allowed
to beat women, period. End of sentence. And why are
people celebrating and dancing and shouting woo hoo? You know
(05:08):
you have one half naked woman drenched in oil, ripping
off her blue wig and waving it around. This is
all over social media. I guess we'll show it on
TV tonight. But a man in a blue top, you know,
squirting the woman who's only wearing underwear with this with
this baby oil lubrikint, you know, which was notoriously used
(05:30):
by Combs during his long freak off bizarro. You know,
sex parties, according to you know the video you know
that we've seen so far. I mean, it is pretty unbelievable. Now,
he was convicted on two counts of transportation to engage
in prostitution, but you know that's ten years in jail.
(05:51):
This guy was facing life in jail. I thought when
they came to this verdict fast, but they couldn't decide
on the one Rico. I thought for sure it was
going to be gilt.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
Let me tell you something. I'm gonna tell you right now,
and there is no right of what I'm saying. All right,
this is just the way that things go. Somebody got
to somebody because everybody's got a guy, and this guy
had a lot of guys.
Speaker 2 (06:14):
This is your theory without any evidence.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
Hence the reason I just said to you, I have
no proof. Hello. My point in saying this is this
guy is famous, he's disgusting, and he had a lot
of nasty, famous people at his parties, and all those
people want to make sure that their dirty little secrets
never come out. And that's exactly.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
What's interesting, because remember, at the beginning of this trial,
they had the names of all these famous people that
they gave to jurors during jury selection and ask people
whether they recognize those names, and a lot of those
names didn't come up during the trial, or if they
did come up, and they only came up in innocuous ways.
(06:52):
And it sounded to me like if these people were
at the famous white parties, freak off parties, you're going
to tell me that they didn't know.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
What was going on. Testify about what's going on.
Speaker 3 (07:07):
It's happening right now in New York City with little
kids that are being trafficked by sick and disgusting and
perverted people. And because the.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Topic is on New York City, is.
Speaker 3 (07:20):
Just New York City, I'm saying it's everywhere, but we're
talking about New York. So while these people are out
in the streets freaking out with their baby oil, some
little five year old is being subjected to a pedophile
and some party somewhere else with a bunch of disgusting
people that I'm sure a lot of us would know
if we knew their names and we knew they were there.
But somebody got to somebody on that jewelry.
Speaker 1 (07:40):
Well, it's a nice You may be right, I have
no idea. Definitely right. You know that's that's your suspicion.
In theory, I have to be open to anything as possible,
But who knows. I don't want to accuse people of
something that we don't know happened. But I will tell
you this, this guy's a bad guy. And if you
have any doubt about it, look at that video tape.
(08:03):
You know, I honestly I cannot understand the level. And
people say, well, drugs will make you do that, Well,
this will make you do things. There's something so off here,
There's something the whole everything that was described is so
bizarre and weird and strange and perverted. And we're not
(08:26):
protecting women in a case like this, and that's that's
what is so frustrating to me. And it's like the
case of Epstein. Well, where was somebody to step in
and stop what was going on in that case? And
then the other people I don't you know, I don't
understand it.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
We move on.
Speaker 1 (08:44):
We're watching the one big beautiful bill. You know, the
process has begun in the House. I'm going to help
Republicans a little bit here with the caveat that I've
been I've been very clear about I don't like every
aspect of the bill. But you know, politicians, generally speaking,
(09:06):
and I have learned over the years, this is how
they work. They always put their self interest and their
re election. Oftentimes they'll put that above what is right.
And what's frustrating to me is knowing that there are
slim majorities in the House and the Senate and Senate.
The Senate in particular, had these arcane parliamentary procedures to
(09:32):
bypass cloture, which would require sixty votes. They only have
fifty three senators they can use when it comes to
budgetary issues what's called reconciliation. And you don't only need
a simple majority.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (09:47):
It ended up being a fifty to fifty vote, a
marathon session of voter rama, as they call it. And
as I was up not last night, but the night before,
all night checking in with my friends in the Senate,
finding out the latest, the latest, the latest, and two o'clock. No,
they didn't have the votes. Four am, they didn't have
the votes. Five am, they didn't have the votes. Six am,
(10:09):
they didn't have the votes. Eight am. I here, it
looks like they got the votes. And Lisa Mkowski, she
wasn't telling people how she was voting, not getting into
the personality aspect of it. And this is where Republicans
sometimes need to ask themselves, if you want to win reelection,
your focus and priorities to get the economy. Two things
(10:31):
drive elections, peace and prosperity, and both are included in
this bill. If you don't want the argument if they
if they let this opportunity be squandered, that's on them.
I don't think they ultimately will. But they can't change
the Senate version because you have the Senate parliamentarian that
was you know, giving you know, every single line of
(10:53):
once twice and fifteen times over, and there are very
rigid rules that they have to follow in the Senate.
So there were changes and provisions. It's about eighty five
percent of what the House bill was originally, and the
House you know, narrowly passed it there. If they changed
the bill again, it means has to go back to
the Senate. The odds are going to be lower that
(11:14):
it'll pass in the Senate. But this is what you
can if you're a politician, tell your constituents about this bill.
You should be proud of. It is the largest tax
cut in American history. And Democrats and your opponent voted
for the largest tax increase in American history. And you
could tell your constituents that you voted for hard working
(11:38):
American men and women, and you voted for no tax
on tips and no tax on overtime of Social Security.
You can tell them that part and Democrats they wouldn't
stand up for working men and women. You could tell
them you voted to fund and fully build a secure
border wall that will protect our country and that Democrats
(11:59):
still are in face of open borders. You can tell
them that you voted for the funding to depoort criminal
illegal immigrants, and Democrats they are fighting for them to
stay like a Brego Garcia and others. You can tell
your constituents that you voted for lower energy prices because
in this bill are all of the policies the president
(12:22):
needs to bring this country to become, put in place
the foundation for us to be an energy dominant, energy
rich country, and will pay less at the pump that's
in this bill. You can tell your constituents the Democrats,
as always, they don't care about high energy prices. You
(12:42):
can proudly say that you voted for the principle of
peace through strength and modernizing a military that has been
neglected for the last four years by Biden and Harris
and Democrats. They voted for appeasement and they voted for
a week Department of Defense. All things you can tell.
(13:03):
You can tell them you voted for law and order
and safety and security. You can tell them that you
voted for reform, and education which is desperately needed, all
of which is in this bill. Now I understand that
they're you know, for example, I can give a number
of examples of things I don't like. And now the
question is, I understand some people they want perfect. You're
(13:27):
not gonna get perfect in Washington. You want perfect, don't
go into politics because you picked the wrong profession. It's like,
if you want a friend and you go to work
in Washington, the only friend you're going to get is
if you get a puppy dog. Get a dog, because
you're not gonna have a lot of friends in Washington.
Go there to serve your constituents. That is a long
(13:47):
laundry list of good things. And the frustrates me is
when I watch Democrats lie and demogogue this bill. Look
for the billionaires and trillionaires. AOC is saying this. Republicans
telling the truth. They're cutting Medicaid Medica.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
No, they're not.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Increasing spending. They're just getting rid of waste, fraud and abuse,
and putting in you know what Bill Clinton supported, which
is a work requirement. Why don't you get out there
and champion all the good things. There's never been more
conservatism in any one bill, not a perfect bill. Why
did blue states get rewarded with salt deductions, state and
(14:27):
local tax deductions? I hate it, but you know what,
it's not going to be perfect. But you needed that
to get Republicans that live in New York and New
Jersey and California. They desperately needed it because they felt
that they needed to tell their constituents that they got
something special for their states, just rewards electing tax and
spend liberals. Anyway, we marxist, mom, Donnie. Now this was
(14:54):
in the New York Post today.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
I read this. I said, no way, did you read this, Linda, that.
Speaker 1 (15:00):
Mam Dami actually celebrated the anniversary of the Russian Revolution.
Now keep in mind, you know it's mom, Danni, it
is AOC. It was this they know, fight the oligarchy,
Ao season, this is a tax cut for millionaires and
millionaires and trillionaires.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
I'm like, okay, no, it's not.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
They just Democrats just lie, like they lie every two years,
like they lie every four years. You know about Republicans,
and they lie. They're lying about this bill. It reminds
me very reminiscent of the the Congress in ninety six
and when they voted to balance the budget and they
(15:44):
reduced the rad of growth of Medicare, and Democrats Demo
god did but if you recalled, Bill Clinton went along
with new King Rich and then the result was amazing
for the American people. And that was, you know, we
balanced the budget four straight years in a row, and
we got on a path to fiscal sanity.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
They did it two ways.
Speaker 1 (16:04):
They had work for requirements, that is in the one
big beautiful bill. By the way, number two.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
They also reduced the radar growth. That is not a cut,
that is an increase, but a lower increase or reducing
the radar growth because it's unsustainable. You're ready are facing Medicare,
Medicaid and social security. Really we can't afford it. It's
on that we're on the brink of bankruptcy. Anyway, Can
I ask a question?
Speaker 3 (16:33):
Can I just ask a question? It's the elephant in
the room. I would ride the elephant. So Elizabeth McDonough
is the parliamentarian. This is an unelected woman who.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
In the one that worked for al Gore.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
And thank you one, yes sir, that one.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
And the one that was appointed by Harry.
Speaker 1 (16:50):
Reid, Thank you, yes, sir. This person is like any
other information to help make your point.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
Well, no, I'm asking a question. I'm not making a point.
I'm asking a question so she can be fired by
the Senate Majority Leader John fuon Republican.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
Trent Lott fired the Senate parliamentarian when he was the
majority leader.
Speaker 3 (17:11):
Fine, John fun should follow in suit, or the Vice
President can overrule her. I'm trying to figure out what
the purpose is of having control of the House and
Senate if we're not going to exact that authority and
use it. She's putting in credit.
Speaker 2 (17:29):
Listen, I thank you.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
I think you ask a very valid question on many
many of the language issues that she originally brought up,
and I was paying very close attention to it, as
you know, I was up all night two nights ago,
and during that whole process when they first had the
first written version and I saw the story and we
(17:53):
talked about it on the air.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
It made me very nervous. By the way.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
In fairness, it did happen with the with Obamacare. The
Senate Parliamentarian had many objections, and it did happen with
the Inflation Reduction Act that Biden used. They did up
many you know, they did have to change the language
in many cases doesn't make a dimes worth of difference,
but there were some key provisions.
Speaker 2 (18:18):
You're right.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
If I had my way, I would have followed suit
and followed the precedent set by Trent Lott. I don't
think the President asked for it, to be very honest,
and I think had the President pushed it, it probably
would have happened. Like for example, I think there is
a strong case to be made on the issue of
the economy as it relates to Jerome Powell.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
I mean, I'll give you an example. There's a story today.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
The boss of Fanny May, Freddie Mack, claimed on Wednesday
that the Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell could lose his
job over his allegedly deceptive testimony to Congress over the
Central banks lavish two point five billion dollar revamp of
their DC headquarters. Now the Federal Housing Finance Agency director,
(19:06):
this guy, William Poulti, who is also the chairman of
the two US back mortgage lenders, demanded that Powell be
probed by lawmakers and suggested that he could even be
fired by President Trump. Quote, I am asking Congress to
investigate Chairman's her own Powell for his political bias, his
deceptive Senate testimony, which is enough to be removed for cause,
(19:31):
he said in a leak statement obtained by The New
York Post, and Powell's two point five billion dollar building
renovation scandals things to high Heaven, and he said he
lied when he was asked about the specifics before Congress.
This is nothing short of malfeasans, the thirty seven year
old former journalist and private equity titan added, and look,
(19:55):
I think the President was right in that handwritten note
and pointing out, you know, all these countries with all
these lower interest rates, and why why aren't they dropping it?
It's for political reasons, that's all. There's no other reason
inflation is down at imagine manageable rate at their targeted goal,
and there's no reason at all to keep interest rates
(20:17):
high now while most indicators on the economy are firing
on all cylinders, far better than anybody else believed. And
even the doubters, even our friend Steven Moore, very very
skeptical wrote the book trump Bonomics, but very skeptical, skeptical
over Trump's tariff policy and trade policy even on this program,
(20:42):
came back and he said, you know what, Donald Trump
was right, and you know I'm saying on this one
big beautiful bill kind of the same thing.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
Again.
Speaker 1 (20:53):
What frustrates me is these guys don't know how to
message things. If you want the arguments on the House floor,
it is the same demagoguery we get every election year.
It's the same thing we got when nukek Ingrich even
(21:14):
partnered with Bill Clinton, and the result was reducing the
rate of growth for Medicare Medicaid from to seven percent
a year every year for seven years. We had four
straight balanced budgets in a row. They have to eliminate
something called baseline budgeting. Now remember too that we also
(21:35):
have another bite or as many bites as the apple
as we want, and there'll be many opportunities for the
House and Senate to get the cost savings that we need,
in effect, so we stop robbing from our kids and grandkids.
That goal of mine I have stated my entire career,
and I want to get to that. But what frustrates
(21:58):
me about summer Pulicans is they're complaining, they're listening too
much to what the Democrats are saying, even the lies
that are being told.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
You know, this is for billionaires and millionaires. No, it's not.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
The people that benefit the most are hard working Americans
and the working class in this country and people that
are lower middle class, the people that are poor, and
people that are middle class. They are the biggest beneficiaries
of this bill. Now, there are certain business incentives that
(22:35):
you might say, well, hennity, if a business builds out
a warehouse and they have certain tax benefits, they're the
biggest beneficiaries.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Are they really the biggest?
Speaker 1 (22:47):
Because all that is going to do is is poor
gasoline on the economy and accelerate its growth.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
And by that I mean.
Speaker 1 (23:01):
If somebody is going to invest tens of millions of
dollars in a pharmaceutical manufacturing company, a semiconductor manufacturing company,
automobi bial manufacturing company, and they're incentivized to do it faster, well,
that's going to help the building industry, which has been
decimated by Powell and his high interest rates. Nobody's going
(23:24):
to give up a two point nine percent thirty year
fixed rate mortgage for a seven percent or seven plus
percent thirty year fixed rate mortgage. And he has stifled
the housing market as a result of all of this,
unnecessarily so based on his own words and definitions. You know,
so there are certain things that people aren't talking about,
(23:45):
the fact that they can't defend the largest tax cut
in American history, and they can't go on offense the
Democrats are supporting the largest tax increase in American history.
It's almost like they have no business being politicians. If
you cannot communicate that, you know, if Sean Hannity is
(24:06):
giving you the benefits of your stupid bill, then you're
out of touch the idea that you can't go out
and herald the fact that this is the first time
any party has ever given service workers the benefit of
not taxing tips and other industry, hardworking people the incentive
(24:29):
to work overtime without taxing all their overtime, not taxing
Social Security up to a much higher level than before.
I mean, those are all things that had never happened before.
You know, Democrats aren't standing up for working men and women.
They know Democrats voted again for open borders. They don't
want to fund the border, and this border needs to
(24:52):
be closed, President Trump, and this bill is closing the border.
President Trump is putting aside monies to get rid of
the known terrorists, murderers, rapists, other violent criminals, cartel members,
gang members, and drug dealers. That's in this bill. Democrats
are voting for more open borders. If you can't sell that,
(25:12):
I can't help you. If you can't go out there
and lay out the importance that Republicans in this bill
are ensuring lower energy prices by opening up drilling and
fracking and coal mining, I can't help you, and that
Democrats are fighting for higher energy prices, the lifeblood of
(25:34):
our economy. If you can't go out there and explain
the importance in a very evil and dangerous world of
the US military or Department of Defense needing money for
the next generation of weaponry i e. Punker buster bombs,
new technology, hypersonic missiles, missile defense, the Iron Dome, which
(25:58):
Democrats are not supporting. I can't help them because all
of that is in the bill. And if you can't
go out there and point out that, oh, finally we'll
get rid of the Department of Education, which has failed spectacularly,
take power away from teachers' unions, give more choice to
(26:18):
parents as a good thing, I can't help you. And
I don't hear these people making those arguments, Linda, I
don't hear it. Yeah, okay, point out the three provisions
you don't like. I'll listen to you and probably agree
with you. I'll concede the point. But I also know
with a three margin, you know, vote lead in the
(26:42):
Senate and using the reconciliation process, as bewildering and arcane
as it is, that is about for now, first shot
at it.
Speaker 2 (26:54):
The best you're gonna do.
Speaker 3 (26:56):
I will give you all of this, and I would
agree with you, and you know that I don't agree
with you on this bill. But I had a conversation
with our friend Jeff Lord who worked for Reagan, this morning,
and he enlightened me onto something which is something that
I've thought for quite a while. Now there's them and
there's us, and there's no in between. The right and
left all work together in one big giant club, which
is how do we get it over the finish lines?
(27:17):
We can all get to July fourth. This is how
I really feel the uniparty. Well said, thank you. He
said the same thing.
Speaker 2 (27:24):
You're welcome.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
It basically helps them and not us, And I think
it's a realization that is painful but unfortunately necessary. Having
said that, if they were to put something into the
bill that said, this is what they need to do
to codify the tax cuts and to help us with
some of the things you're talking about, like energy and
things like that, so that they can come back to
the table with the reconciliation to take out all the
(27:45):
woke crap. I would be okay with that. So let
them add the promise so that we actually get to
the other reconciliation to get the crap out of it.
Speaker 1 (27:52):
The problem there's no room for additions after it leaves
the Senate.
Speaker 2 (27:56):
It's it.
Speaker 3 (27:57):
Yeah, well we could if the vice president or the
Senate the majority leader fired at the parliamentarian, then her
bill would be null and void.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
I'll conceded.
Speaker 1 (28:05):
The stated plan is that they are going to, you know,
go back and make some of the do more.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Now, there's an argument to be made. This bill is
too big, and I actually am kind.
Speaker 3 (28:18):
Of nty pages. I bet none of them read the whole.
Speaker 1 (28:21):
Day, Greg Greg, Well, I don't know how they could
miss it. Chucky Schumer made him read it on the
on the Could you.
Speaker 3 (28:27):
Listen to Chucky Schumer for nine hundred and forty pages?
Speaker 1 (28:30):
Come on, Well, thank god it was a clerk, it
wasn't him. Of clerks, and I'm just saying, I'm just
laying out the good parts of it. Now, why is
this imperative?
Speaker 2 (28:39):
Now?
Speaker 1 (28:39):
New Kingrich made the point is you need lead up
time to November twenty six. If you do all these
things for the economy, and you factor in the the
incalculable impact on the economy that energy dominance will have,
and the ten and a half, I'm we have another
(29:01):
it's soon to be another half a trillion dollars in
manufacturing investment and the impact that'll have on the economy.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
And in this notion that people don't understand, you.
Speaker 1 (29:12):
Cut taxes, it increases revenues to the government. Trump proved it.
Reagan doubled revenues in eight years. Oh well, we didn't
factor in the cost of the tax cuts. There is
no cost to tax cuts, you morons. That's supply side
one oh one. That just infuriates me. Republicans don't even
know their own philosophy, never mind articulating it.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
It's I can't stand it. They don't know how to fight.
They had to fight
The Sean Hannity Show News
Host
Sean Hannity
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com