May 28, 2024 • 33 mins
Sean looks at the upcoming verdict for President Trump's trial and worries aloud about how deep politics have penetrated into our justice system. Can anything be fair for President Trump?!
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. Happy Monday, if you
want to call it that eight hundred that's a Tuesday. Actually,
I hope you had a great Memorial Day or very
thanks to all of those people that sacrificed all so
that we may live free. Pretty amazing the blood, the
sacrifice that so many gave for all of us. No
(00:24):
greater love hath any Man is there when you think
about it, I will tell you. And before we get
to the ins and outs of all that's been happening
with closing arguments in this sham New York courtroom today,
let me just give you a quick headline. As the
defense is now I'm sorry with the prosecution is now begun.
(00:45):
They're closing arguments. I am completely stunned, absolutely stunned at
the fact that the prosecution is spending so much time
in efforts to rehabilitate Cone's disastrous testimony. And I think
(01:05):
it just speaks volumes that they sound desperate, and the
same with Stormy Daniels. They're trying to rehabilitate her image
with the jury, and I mean to get to the
point that there are so many lies that they even
they realize that they have to rationalize, which is why
the prosecution, this guy Steinlass is given the clothes for
(01:25):
the prosecution, you know, then says, oh, well, forget about Cone.
There's there's a mountain of other evidence. What other mountain
of evidence? And if so, why did you bring him
on the stand to begin with? I mean, it's pretty unbelievable.
He starts out by telling the jury the noise, you know,
go tune out the noise, the side show of the defense.
(01:46):
Con is understandably angry because he he's the only one
paying the price. Understandably angry. He's selling t shirts of
Donald Trump in jail and admitting he will profit if,
in fact, on the outcome of this case. This is
a convicted liar, admitted liar, proven liar, and also a
thief on top of it. And then to have to,
(02:08):
you know, go into this long drawn out defense of
Michael Cohne. You can't blame Cone selling merchandise and making
money on Donald Trump. Well, it certainly goes to the
heart of the motives of their star witness. Of course,
of course you can blame him for that that he
hasn't that he has a that he'll benefit from the
(02:29):
outcome in this case.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
And yeah, Stormy Daniel's story is messy.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
I cannot believe how defensive they are and and this
effort at rehabilitating them. And anyway, Combe was was convicted
of a crime that was that Trump's direction. That immediately
got an objection, rightly so, because there's no evidence that
was brought forth in this trial that says any of that.
Just the opposite, regardless of what Cone may have testified
(02:57):
at different points in this trial. At one point he
had to acknowledge that he told many people in the
pres and elsewhere that he and he alone did this
without informing Donald Trump. And then the absurdity of him
writing Keith Schiller, Trump's security agent and saying that he's
(03:17):
got this fourteen year old prankster. Will you help me
with the prankster? Aligning with the phone call that he
says is the phone call that Donald Trump that he
informed Donald Trump about the Stormy Daniels deal. That whole
phone call was a minute in thirty six seconds, and
he had testified to that a week prior. And then
when he admits that that was the phone call, he
(03:38):
tries to save it by saying oh, I did both.
I talked about the fourteen year old Starker and I
talked about Stormy Daniels that he went into excruciating detail with.
So he said, and this doesn't matter in this case.
You know, it's pretty unbelievable. And you know conefields Trump
did him dirty. That's their best argument. So that you
(04:01):
want to justify a way that the fact that this admitted,
convicted liar that is making money off off Donald Trump
by selling T shirts and merch with Donald Trump in jail.
I mean, this is how bad this got. And then
Conan and Schiller they know each other well, they spoke
in a coded language. Huh okay, where did that conspiracy
(04:24):
theory come from? And you know what, Donald Trump picked Combe.
We didn't pick Michael Cone. Trump did, well, you picked
him as your star witness, So you did pick Donald
Trump up picked Michael Cone to go against Donald Trump.
And then says, well, if Trump, if Cone is such
a liar, why didn't he go all the way and
say that Trump slept with Stormy Daniels. That's an easy
(04:45):
one because he'd been on record repeatedly saying the opposite.
That's probably why you know Cone was drawn to Trump
like morth to a flame. What does that have to
do with anything about the veracity of their star witness
and the testimony here, and the prosecutors.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Saying they don't even well, we don't even need Cone.
Speaker 1 (05:03):
There's a ton of other evidence without them, without listening
the other evidence without them. You know, this case is
not about Cone, but con could connect the dots. That's
if you believe Cone, whose testimony was impeached.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
And again he's an admitted, convicted liar.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
And even in this case, you know, many experts are
pretty convinced he told multiple lies here. I mean, it is,
it is unbelievable what has gone on in this courtroom. Well,
let me let me backtrack for a second, as all
of this is unfolding here, and I'm going to be
very very honest with you. I'm not pollyannish about things.
(05:39):
I have a duty to be honest with you, my audience,
and I will follow through with that. You know, I
told you from the beginning of this trial that Donald
Trump could not get a fair trial in New York.
I also mentioned DC or Fulton County, Georgia. Can't, is it?
Speaker 2 (05:57):
You know?
Speaker 1 (05:58):
Nine out of ten people in New York and this
venue are registered Democrats. Okay, not exactly Trump friendly territory.
I think maybe got twelve percent of the vote. I
think in twenty twenty. You know, you just go back
to the beginning. You have a judge is a Biden donor.
You have the judge's daughter and these allegations that you know,
(06:20):
she's not allegations she works with prominent Democrats and might
actually benefit from the outcome of this case and fundraise
off it. Okay, that's a problem too. It we never
got into the bottom up. We have a DA that
ran on a platform to get Donald Trump. We learned
from Bob Costello that he spent an hour and a
(06:40):
half on a zoom call with the DA's lawyers explaining
all the exculpatory evidence that he had that was purposely
withheld from the indicting grand jury in this case.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
That would be excuse me.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
Any prosecutor has a legal obligation to do so, one
of what will be many means of appeal for Trump
should there be a conviction in this case. The judge,
you know, look at the judge's actions towards the end
of this case. The judge basically is trying to put
cinderplocks on the side of the prosecution and the scales
(07:21):
of justice to bring this case back because it was
such a disaster with with all the testimony of their
star witness and Stormy Daniels, and he.
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Allowed it to go on.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
The judge won't allow the former FEC chair to actually
go into great specificity and explain the law in a
court of law by lawyers. No, no, no, that's my job.
Oh okay, he's been so fair up to this point.
And the jury instructions will will will be the you
(07:53):
know all, but be it, you know, a judge's conviction
based on the desperation that the judge has shown in
the final days this this whole trial, this sham trial.
But you got to remember a couple of facts here
because they're very relevant. Biden's weaponized Department of Justice, the FEC,
the Southern District of New York, Bragg's predecessor, Cyrus Vance,
(08:17):
and Bragg even himself didn't bring the case or want
to bring the case. Bragg was embarrassed into bringing the
case after these two guys in this case, you know,
left at a protest that because they wanted to get
Donald Trump so bad but again Bragg ran on a
platform to get Trump. You have a misdemeanor whose statute
(08:41):
of limitations had long passed. And then the mystery novel
legal theory that nobody even to this day can explain
that allows a city jurisdiction to upcharge to a federal
felony crime. Again, the statute of limitations had run out.
Their star Win is an admitted liar and a convicted
(09:04):
felon for lying. Now a thief that comes out in
this case.
Speaker 2 (09:08):
Well, Trump signed.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
The Trump said he knew everything that went on and
the Trump organization he signed the checks. Okay, if he
knew everything, how come he didn't know Michael Cohne was
stealing from him. Add to that the fact that a
non disclosure agreement is not illegal, Catch and kill is
not illegal. Stormy was allowed to drone on about you know,
(09:32):
irrelevant immaterial information's hillatious innuendo, allowed to discuss talking to
dead people and costello, you know, ordered by a very
angry judge who clears the court room in spectacular fashion
because he rolled his eyes.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Oh my god, to think of it.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
You know, he can't impeach their star witnesses testimony, not
in front of a jury, not in his courtroom, or
expose the exculpatory evidence that was with help from a
grand jury. Now, there's so many reasons why any guilty
verdict would be overturned on appeal, but likely that would
be post election. That's why Donald Trump keeps saying that
(10:14):
you know this, this is election interference. I mean, hopefully there
are people on that jury that will see all of
this for what it is. But beyond that, let me
just start by saying, this is a sad, sad day
for this country. This is a pathetic day for justice
(10:35):
in America. This is a really dangerous time for our
constitutional republic. You see the rule of law dying before
your eyes, equal justice, equal application of our laws, you know,
dissipating before our very eyes. And I got to tell
you something. I think maybe the best thing then in
(10:55):
closing that the defense did was was rightly identify by
Michael Kohne, who they're desperately trying to rehabilitate in the
prosecution's closing arguments and refer to him as the gloat
the greatest liar of all time.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Ouch. I think the jury will remember.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
That, you know, the only corroborate corroboration of Cohne's testimony
in the crucial meeting would be this guy Weiselberg. Weisenberger
is his name, who prosecutors could have immunized give. I mean,
they could have given him immunity in this case, and
they could have called him. The only reason they wouldn't
(11:37):
call him is because they know he would have testified
that Coohne lied about the meeting, and at that point,
after the disaster that was Cone, they weren't going to
make it an any worse than it was, which is
why I mean, they are just they are just fixated
on trying to rehabilitate and then just totally dismissed their
own witnesses in this case.
Speaker 2 (11:59):
I don't think I've ever seen a case like this
in my life. It's unbelievable.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
It's, you know, trying to say in twenty fifteen and
meeting a Trump Tower was a subversion of democracy, and
the judge is going to let that in as if
it has any relevance in this case.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
It does not.
Speaker 1 (12:17):
Now back to earlier in the day, Todd Blanche, you know,
offering closing arguments for the defense and rightly just pointing
out President Trump's innocent, He didn't commit any crimes. The
DA did not meet the burden of proof. That should
be the end of it. And here's the saddest part
of all of this to me, after talking to so
many people that have been watching the case in the
(12:39):
courtroom and their observations of the jury. I mean, I'll
refer to Matt Gates. There's six to eight people on
that jury. He thinks that would convict Donald Trump for
killing Jimmy Hoffa. Oh, I don't like the odds in
that case. So I can't tell you what outcome to expect,
but you better expect the worst in this case, in
(12:59):
this court room with this judge that is a bidened downer.
I mean, it's simple basic common sense by New York law.
He should have recused himself. He didn't recuse himself. You know,
as the defense pointed out, they should want more than
Michael Kohne and demand more than the testimony of Keith Davidson,
(13:21):
an attorney who was trying to, in their words, extort money.
He says, the consequence is simple, it's a not guilty verdict.
This case is about documents, and we seem to forget
that part. In other words, it's a paper case. It's
not about an encounter which Stormy Daniels eighteen years ago
that she repeatedly denied ever happened, including as late as
(13:43):
January of twenty eighteen. It's not even about a non
disclosure agreement of eight years ago. The charges are about
whether or not Donald Trump had anything to do with
payments to Cone on his personal accounting ledger. And the
answer is the bookings were accurate. No, no intent to defraud,
and intent is part of the law, not that I
think the judge will bring that up and make it
(14:06):
as conspicuous for this jury as he should. And no
conspiracy to influence the twenty sixteen election. And there's been
no evidence to prove that there was. Case closed. Not guilty,
but you can't count on that. I cannot emphasize how
shocking this is at the desperation of the prosecution in
(14:27):
this case. I mean that they are now trying to
defend Kohne. And don't get me wrong, Cone made his bed.
A few jurors just shook their head at the prosecutor.
I'm told by people in the courtroom. Jurors are yawning now,
very in the weeds. Hard to follow But how spectacular
is this. You have the closing arguments of the prosecuting
(14:50):
prosecution admitting that Michael Cone committed grand larceny and they
knew about it, they didn't charge him with it, then
justifying him selling merchandise. You can't blame him because he
has only this connection to sell. He's portraying Cone like
he's selling goods on the street to support his family
to live in Trump a Trump condo, and he's making
(15:13):
what four and a half million dollars between the podcast,
the books, and the merch Really, that's what they're saying.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Wow, I've never seen anything like this. He never stops
working for the good of a country.
Speaker 1 (15:37):
Sean Hannity with behind the scenes information on today's breaking news.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
Hannity is on right now twenty five to the top
of the hour.
Speaker 1 (15:48):
I have a lot of economic news I probably won't
get to today in light of closing arguments ongoing in
the Trump trial of New York. But none of the
economic news is any good.
Speaker 2 (15:58):
None of it.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
A lot of you know, oh, firsthand, you're struggling with
everyday bills. Everything is more expensive than ever. I mean,
it's unbelievable. About twelve grand more than you were spending
four years ago for the exact same stuff. Now, if
you do own a home, I want you to consider
getting a free no obligation consultation from our friends at
Americanfinancing dot net I because interest rates now are are
(16:22):
far lower than they've been in a long time, and
compared especially to credit card interest rates twenty one percent plus. Well,
they're able to save their customers an average of eight
hundred and fifty four bucks a month. That's like a
ten thousand dollars a year raise. And they do it
by tapping into their homes equity. It wipes out high
(16:42):
interest card debt. You know, average home prices in the
last year up eight point seven percent. Okay, there's real
money there that you could tap into anyway. That is
a fortune. And credit card interest rates are insane and
if you're carrying a balanced month to month, you're never
going to pay it off. American Finance and can help
you take care of that. And maybe if you're ending
each month in the red, they'll get you into the
(17:04):
black real quick. If you call today for your free
noow obligation consultation, you may even you know, miss a
mortgage payment or two legally, call eight sixty six sixty
one five ninety two hundred eighty sixty six sixty one
five ninety two hundred on the Webitsamericanfinancing dot.
Speaker 3 (17:20):
Net NMLS twenty two three three four animalis Consumer access
dot org. If you ever rds in the five started
six point seven x nine percent for well qualified borrows,
called eight sixty six one five ninety two hundred for
details about credit cost.
Speaker 1 (17:28):
In terms I cannot get over that you have the
prosecution for in this case. And we've just gone over
all the reasons, you know from the beginning, how conflicted
they were, and the judges conflicted in this case. But
then literally just you know, dismissing Michael Cohne's admission he
(17:51):
stole from Donald Trump. He could call it larceny, whatever
term legal term is justified in this case, but anyway,
and then justifying him selling all this merchandise and saying.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
You can't blame him, You can't blame him.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
If Donald Trump was was responsible for this, would you
blame him? I mean, he's literally, you know, we're not
talking about a guy that's living on the streets in
New York. He's living in a multimillion dollar Trump condo,
and he struggles, you know what, we made four and
a half million dollars on his books and his podcast
(18:30):
and his merch as the as the prosecution even admits, Oh,
there's nothing wrong with telling merchandise, you know, selling merchandise
on Trump.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
You can't blame them. What do you mean?
Speaker 1 (18:41):
You can't blame them? And he has an outcome in
this case. He has a bias in this case. That's
why it's relevant.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
You know.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
Then he of course belittles his past perjury and he says,
you know, well, he has a little problem with taking responsibility.
That's your answer. This is your means of rehabilitating your
star witness in this case. This is what they're now offering,
an excuse that's okay to light to Congress, light to
a court, light to your family, light to your client,
(19:12):
based on what your own testimony said. I mean, it's
pretty unbelievable. You know, let's just forget about the larceny
and the perjury and the convictions and the admissions. Let's
just move straight to the convicting Trump and that we're
going to use him as your star witness. But we
don't need him. There's a mountain of other evidence that
they have yet to identify. One thing Andy McCarthy pointed
(19:35):
out is the DA in New York just made up
a property right supposedly vested in the voting public to
politically damaging information about candidates. And he said, this is
important on the intent to defraud, because there's no fraud
unless there's a deceptive scheme to deprive someone of some
property right. Well, that's Bragg making up his own version
(19:56):
of federal campaign finance law, in which any expense which
is intended to influence the outcome of the election, no
matter whether the expense would have existed independent of the
campaign as a campaign expenditure, the triggers the FEC. Again,
I go back. The FFEC didn't act on any allegations here.
They didn't find any wrongdoing, Nor did Biden's weaponize DOJ,
(20:19):
nor did the SDNY, nor did Bragg's predecessor and originally
brag himself until he was embarrassed into bringing this case.
And then of course the third highest ranking Justice Department
official under Biden brought in to argue this case. Let's
leave my prestigious position of the DOJ, and maybe that
will result in me getting a promotion down the line.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
Who knows. But this is not the law.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
And this is why Bradley Smith, former FEC chair, his
testimony was crucial. And of course he was only going
to be able to testify on a limited basis.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
But if he was free to testify on the law.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
In a court of law, being a you know, it
would put a whole different take on this case. It's
pretty amazing, you know. Or the prosecutor in this case,
stressing Cone, pled guilty to the crime committed to Trump's direction. Okay,
the defense objection was overruled. Just like everything else, this
(21:19):
judge is trying to throw their way. It's just the
most unbelievable thing I've ever seen. I mean, the judge
in the final days, based on the disaster. You know,
Donald Trump was trying to subvert democracy. Well, they're attempting
to subvert democracy here, and they're willing to make up,
(21:41):
you know, new case law that doesn't exist and come
up with a novel legal theory to do it. You know,
there are two things that he expects the jury must
find relating to the documents. The documents contained false centuries
that Trump acted with intent to defraud. He said, the
records are not false. They were labeled as a business expense.
He's correct, there was no intent to defraud. Nor is
(22:05):
a catch and kill operation illegal, nor is a NDA illegal.
And unless you prove an intent to defraud. Is a
whole host of reasons why somebody might sign an NDA.
One might be just be the sheer cost to one's family,
let's start there, which is believable. And that again, the
burden of proof is on the prosecution in the case.
(22:29):
You know, Blanche pulled out invoices and bouchers. You know that,
you know, create the voucher based on what they knew
on the at the time. And he says the info
on the checks was auto inputed by the invoices and
the vouchers. Not a single invoice was ever sent to
Donald Trump, And there's no recollection that the invoices were
(22:49):
staple to the checks at all, and it was the
general practice of the Trump organization. But there's there's no
evidence that that that anybody ever brought forward in this case.
I can't tell you how many times I have my
accountants sent me something to sign and I'm like, okay,
I'll sign it. They just you know, you count on
people to do this. Why do you think Weiselberg was
(23:11):
never called in this case because he would have contradicted
everything Cone said and that case would have been close shut,
and the prosecution chose not to bring him. You know,
Blanch showed a twenty seventeen May email from Cone to Weiselberg.
He says, the government wants the jury to believe in
a conspiratorial agreement to falsify the records that Cone was
(23:31):
working for free, but that contradicts to Cone in his
own testimony, and Macone said that he did this of
his own volition and told members of the press he
did it of his own volition without the knowledge of Trump.
Lance said that the email that you can see con
asked Weiselberg to call based on where Cone was doing
for Trump. Lance, you know, it's unbelievable. And you know,
(23:57):
as earlier in this by the defense that cloeeing argull
what Cone told you on the witness stand is not true.
Lance continued, there's no evidence President Trump knew anything about
this voucher's system. There's not been a shred of evidence presented,
not a single word of it. Then he discussed the
DJT trust. When Trump became quotas calling you know it,
(24:21):
you know matters because initially he wanted to pay Cone
out of his trust et cetera, et cetera. But Trump
wasn't running the Trump organization at the time. Remember he
had to give that up at the time. It's unbelievable,
you know, it's uh, it's really unbelievable. Lance then gets
to the underlying quote so called crime and laying out
(24:43):
that a conspiracy to influence the election. Well, that's true,
that's called trying to win an election. It's not sufficient
to find there was an attempt to commit a crime
in this case. Yours must find that there were unlawful means,
actually said, I expect prosecutors will say that unlawful means
were established through either campaign finance violations, tax violations, or
(25:06):
books or records violations. Then he just tore apart the
whole Stormy Daniel's issue, says, you know, it was already
published in twenty eleven. She had denied it multiple times.
How could it at that point influence the twenty sixteen election.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
What a great point. It's unreal.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Lance says, Stormy went public because Larry Flint was will
in a pair legal fees Lance says the recording between
Conan Davidson and Davidson calls the payment settlers remorse. Blan
says Stormy was able to get out of the NBA,
write a book, have a podcast. He says it started
out as extortion and ended very well for Stormy. You know, unbelievable.
(25:53):
Blanch says Costello testified last week and said Cone told
him Trump did not know about the payment to Stormy.
Bland said that this is another example of Cone taking
the stand and quote lying his words. He continues, I
don't know how many lies are enough lies to reject
Cone's testimony. You know, he's the gloat, the greatest liar
(26:14):
of all time. Was pretty devastating. Then he did ten
things that I thought were very effective. He laid out
ten reasons for reasonable doubt. One invoices created by Cone
accurate and Trump had no intent to defraud. No evidence
Trump knew the invoices were sent. No evidence, that's reasonable doubt.
Any testimony of Cone is reasonable doubt too, but put
(26:37):
that aside. He says that February fourteen, twenty seventeen, vouchers
no evidence Trump saw anything that this person uh tarisof
who testified did with the vouchers three. No evidence of intent,
which is part of the law to defraud the ten
ninety nine issue Trump tweeted and submitted to all of
(27:00):
government ethics here ready they didn't defraud it for no
intent to unlawfully influence the twenty sixteen election. And he says,
you'll have to prove a conspiracy of unlawful means. The
Federal Election Campaign Act must willfully violate the FECA, and
that is no evidence of willfully violating that or tax laws.
(27:24):
Weiselberg says, you know, well, gross up. No evidence of
improper handling by Trump. No evidence of falsifying business records.
No falsification of business records it was labeled as a
legal expense. No evidence that Donald Trump knew anything, which
is key and critical to the paragraph that.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
Says you must show intent.
Speaker 1 (27:48):
No evidence of your illegal effort to influence the twenty
sixteen election. Oh okay, because how would you prove that
when everybody knew about it twenty eleven? No evidence, you know,
ami would have? You know, the story that Trump had
fathered this other child, which was completely false and debunk
shows that, you know, when people make false allegations, oftentimes
(28:11):
people pay for them. That ought to make people sympathetic
to people that you know are in that situation. Stormy
had already gone public. McDougal didn't want the story to
go public. She wanted her career to continue. That's where
she made the deal with Ami. Government made mistakes with
presenting evidence Malania's text to Cone asking him to call Trump,
(28:35):
but no evidence of a phone call text between Cone
and Schiller about the fourteen year old harassing them. Cone's
phone sink, no evidence you know, on the device used
for sink or wiping sinking. How can you trust the
recording between Cone and Trump as reliable? And by the way,
(28:56):
they didn't hear the whole recording. And then he ended
with Michael Cone is the human embodiment of reasonable doubt.
He'd lie to you repeatedly. He is biased, he is motivated.
And then the president's attorney said, the kind of witness
you want is one to tell the truth. Wow, this
(29:19):
is what's going on in the courtroom today. But I
go back to where I started, and nothing in this trial. Nothing,
you know, an expired crime, statute of limitations have run out,
the mysterious secondary crime you know, and a lying witness
(29:39):
who turns out to also be a thief. I mean,
that's that just sums it all up, which is why
it's it's kind of shocking to hear it and see it.
But they really don't have any choice but to try
and rehabilitate the damage done by both Cone and Stormy Daniels.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
It really is, you know.
Speaker 1 (29:59):
And then I guess they'll go on with four hours
of closing arguments from the prosecution. But you do have
this missing witness, and that being Weiselberg, which the prosecution
didn't call because he would not confirm what Cone said,
and I would have probably ended the case even for
(30:19):
the moment. And by the way, they rightly said, this
isn't about Trump, and thus jury promised they wouldn't make
it about Trump.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
Good luck with that part.
Speaker 1 (30:29):
Unbelievable and making up a fraud crime with no evidence.
Speaker 2 (30:35):
That's what's been going on here. Unbelievable.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
You know, if you worry about, you know, equal justice,
equal application of our laws, Well, this is a sad
day in the United States of America. Regardless of the outcome.
You can't make the case that Donald Trump got a
fair trial in New York. It's like in the civil
case were the eighteen million dollars, No, it's not, it's
(31:03):
or it's closer to a billion. And the judge stood
by that, stands by that and was able to get
away with that. How do you possibly get get there?
You know them the prosecutors defending Michael Cohne's phone records.
He's really defensive about Michael Cohne. The call between David
Pecker and Trump makes it impossible to claim that Cone
(31:26):
acted independently. Where's the evidence to prove what happened in that?
Where is the evidence there? Where's the mountain of evidence
that they say exists beyond Michael Cone doesn't exist. One
thing that there is evidence for is that the mission
of Preborn to offer free forty ultrasounds to expecting moms
has an impact on people's hearts and minds.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
Linda, The ward's one.
Speaker 3 (31:50):
Of those things where it's just one of those those
amazing organizations that's doing something that nobody else is doing.
And we all have a lot of responsibility. We all
have a lot of things we got to pay for.
We're in a bid economy. We don't have two nickels
to rub together. But if you do, and if you can,
please know that you're saving a life. It's twenty eight
dollars for one ultrasound. If you can afford more than one,
just know with every twenty eight dollars you are saving
(32:11):
another life. So we just ask you to go to
your phone, hit pound two fifty, enter the keyword baby.
You literally will not regret this. You are saving a life.
There is no greater deed that you can do for
your country, for God, for yourself. Trust me, it's better
than any Starbucks you're gonna buy any time in the
near future.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
All right, pound two fifty keyword baby, pound two fifty
keyword baby. On the web, it's preborn dot com slash
Shawn Sea n preborn dot com slash Sean.
Speaker 3 (32:42):
Ell Aria.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
You're help now say my name Sean Hannity.
Speaker 3 (32:47):
You're damn right, and this is the Sean Hannity Show.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
All right, Well we come back.
Speaker 1 (32:57):
I know, Greg Jarrett and to Severino and Leo two
point on Terrell's you know, I'm sure they have a
lot to say. Everybody I've been watching is just like
a gas that what has been happening the court is
in our recess. But we'll go through the day's events
and try to get you up to speed on everything
I know it gets complicated and hard. We'll have full
(33:19):
complete legal coverage. People that were in the courtroom. We
have four of them on Hannity tonight nine Eastern on
the Fox News Channel. We'll tell you more about that
as we continue your calls, We'll try and get in
as many as we can. Eight one hundred nine to
four one shown our number.
All right, thank you, Scott Shannon, and thanks to all
of you for being with us. Happy Monday, if you
want to call it that eight hundred that's a Tuesday. Actually,
I hope you had a great Memorial Day or very
thanks to all of those people that sacrificed all so
that we may live free. Pretty amazing the blood, the
sacrifice that so many gave for all of us. No
(00:24):
greater love hath any Man is there when you think
about it, I will tell you. And before we get
to the ins and outs of all that's been happening
with closing arguments in this sham New York courtroom today,
let me just give you a quick headline. As the
defense is now I'm sorry with the prosecution is now begun.
(00:45):
They're closing arguments. I am completely stunned, absolutely stunned at
the fact that the prosecution is spending so much time
in efforts to rehabilitate Cone's disastrous testimony. And I think
(01:05):
it just speaks volumes that they sound desperate, and the
same with Stormy Daniels. They're trying to rehabilitate her image
with the jury, and I mean to get to the
point that there are so many lies that they even
they realize that they have to rationalize, which is why
the prosecution, this guy Steinlass is given the clothes for
(01:25):
the prosecution, you know, then says, oh, well, forget about Cone.
There's there's a mountain of other evidence. What other mountain
of evidence? And if so, why did you bring him
on the stand to begin with? I mean, it's pretty unbelievable.
He starts out by telling the jury the noise, you know,
go tune out the noise, the side show of the defense.
(01:46):
Con is understandably angry because he he's the only one
paying the price. Understandably angry. He's selling t shirts of
Donald Trump in jail and admitting he will profit if,
in fact, on the outcome of this case. This is
a convicted liar, admitted liar, proven liar, and also a
thief on top of it. And then to have to,
(02:08):
you know, go into this long drawn out defense of
Michael Cohne. You can't blame Cone selling merchandise and making
money on Donald Trump. Well, it certainly goes to the
heart of the motives of their star witness. Of course,
of course you can blame him for that that he
hasn't that he has a that he'll benefit from the
(02:29):
outcome in this case.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
And yeah, Stormy Daniel's story is messy.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
I cannot believe how defensive they are and and this
effort at rehabilitating them. And anyway, Combe was was convicted
of a crime that was that Trump's direction. That immediately
got an objection, rightly so, because there's no evidence that
was brought forth in this trial that says any of that.
Just the opposite, regardless of what Cone may have testified
(02:57):
at different points in this trial. At one point he
had to acknowledge that he told many people in the
pres and elsewhere that he and he alone did this
without informing Donald Trump. And then the absurdity of him
writing Keith Schiller, Trump's security agent and saying that he's
(03:17):
got this fourteen year old prankster. Will you help me
with the prankster? Aligning with the phone call that he
says is the phone call that Donald Trump that he
informed Donald Trump about the Stormy Daniels deal. That whole
phone call was a minute in thirty six seconds, and
he had testified to that a week prior. And then
when he admits that that was the phone call, he
(03:38):
tries to save it by saying oh, I did both.
I talked about the fourteen year old Starker and I
talked about Stormy Daniels that he went into excruciating detail with.
So he said, and this doesn't matter in this case.
You know, it's pretty unbelievable. And you know conefields Trump
did him dirty. That's their best argument. So that you
(04:01):
want to justify a way that the fact that this admitted,
convicted liar that is making money off off Donald Trump
by selling T shirts and merch with Donald Trump in jail.
I mean, this is how bad this got. And then
Conan and Schiller they know each other well, they spoke
in a coded language. Huh okay, where did that conspiracy
(04:24):
theory come from? And you know what, Donald Trump picked Combe.
We didn't pick Michael Cone. Trump did, well, you picked
him as your star witness, So you did pick Donald
Trump up picked Michael Cone to go against Donald Trump.
And then says, well, if Trump, if Cone is such
a liar, why didn't he go all the way and
say that Trump slept with Stormy Daniels. That's an easy
(04:45):
one because he'd been on record repeatedly saying the opposite.
That's probably why you know Cone was drawn to Trump
like morth to a flame. What does that have to
do with anything about the veracity of their star witness
and the testimony here, and the prosecutors.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Saying they don't even well, we don't even need Cone.
Speaker 1 (05:03):
There's a ton of other evidence without them, without listening
the other evidence without them. You know, this case is
not about Cone, but con could connect the dots. That's
if you believe Cone, whose testimony was impeached.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
And again he's an admitted, convicted liar.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
And even in this case, you know, many experts are
pretty convinced he told multiple lies here. I mean, it is,
it is unbelievable what has gone on in this courtroom. Well,
let me let me backtrack for a second, as all
of this is unfolding here, and I'm going to be
very very honest with you. I'm not pollyannish about things.
(05:39):
I have a duty to be honest with you, my audience,
and I will follow through with that. You know, I
told you from the beginning of this trial that Donald
Trump could not get a fair trial in New York.
I also mentioned DC or Fulton County, Georgia. Can't, is it?
Speaker 2 (05:57):
You know?
Speaker 1 (05:58):
Nine out of ten people in New York and this
venue are registered Democrats. Okay, not exactly Trump friendly territory.
I think maybe got twelve percent of the vote. I
think in twenty twenty. You know, you just go back
to the beginning. You have a judge is a Biden donor.
You have the judge's daughter and these allegations that you know,
(06:20):
she's not allegations she works with prominent Democrats and might
actually benefit from the outcome of this case and fundraise
off it. Okay, that's a problem too. It we never
got into the bottom up. We have a DA that
ran on a platform to get Donald Trump. We learned
from Bob Costello that he spent an hour and a
(06:40):
half on a zoom call with the DA's lawyers explaining
all the exculpatory evidence that he had that was purposely
withheld from the indicting grand jury in this case.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
That would be excuse me.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
Any prosecutor has a legal obligation to do so, one
of what will be many means of appeal for Trump
should there be a conviction in this case. The judge,
you know, look at the judge's actions towards the end
of this case. The judge basically is trying to put
cinderplocks on the side of the prosecution and the scales
(07:21):
of justice to bring this case back because it was
such a disaster with with all the testimony of their
star witness and Stormy Daniels, and he.
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Allowed it to go on.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
The judge won't allow the former FEC chair to actually
go into great specificity and explain the law in a
court of law by lawyers. No, no, no, that's my job.
Oh okay, he's been so fair up to this point.
And the jury instructions will will will be the you
(07:53):
know all, but be it, you know, a judge's conviction
based on the desperation that the judge has shown in
the final days this this whole trial, this sham trial.
But you got to remember a couple of facts here
because they're very relevant. Biden's weaponized Department of Justice, the FEC,
the Southern District of New York, Bragg's predecessor, Cyrus Vance,
(08:17):
and Bragg even himself didn't bring the case or want
to bring the case. Bragg was embarrassed into bringing the
case after these two guys in this case, you know,
left at a protest that because they wanted to get
Donald Trump so bad but again Bragg ran on a
platform to get Trump. You have a misdemeanor whose statute
(08:41):
of limitations had long passed. And then the mystery novel
legal theory that nobody even to this day can explain
that allows a city jurisdiction to upcharge to a federal
felony crime. Again, the statute of limitations had run out.
Their star Win is an admitted liar and a convicted
(09:04):
felon for lying. Now a thief that comes out in
this case.
Speaker 2 (09:08):
Well, Trump signed.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
The Trump said he knew everything that went on and
the Trump organization he signed the checks. Okay, if he
knew everything, how come he didn't know Michael Cohne was
stealing from him. Add to that the fact that a
non disclosure agreement is not illegal, Catch and kill is
not illegal. Stormy was allowed to drone on about you know,
(09:32):
irrelevant immaterial information's hillatious innuendo, allowed to discuss talking to
dead people and costello, you know, ordered by a very
angry judge who clears the court room in spectacular fashion
because he rolled his eyes.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Oh my god, to think of it.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
You know, he can't impeach their star witnesses testimony, not
in front of a jury, not in his courtroom, or
expose the exculpatory evidence that was with help from a
grand jury. Now, there's so many reasons why any guilty
verdict would be overturned on appeal, but likely that would
be post election. That's why Donald Trump keeps saying that
(10:14):
you know this, this is election interference. I mean, hopefully there
are people on that jury that will see all of
this for what it is. But beyond that, let me
just start by saying, this is a sad, sad day
for this country. This is a pathetic day for justice
(10:35):
in America. This is a really dangerous time for our
constitutional republic. You see the rule of law dying before
your eyes, equal justice, equal application of our laws, you know,
dissipating before our very eyes. And I got to tell
you something. I think maybe the best thing then in
(10:55):
closing that the defense did was was rightly identify by
Michael Kohne, who they're desperately trying to rehabilitate in the
prosecution's closing arguments and refer to him as the gloat
the greatest liar of all time.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Ouch. I think the jury will remember.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
That, you know, the only corroborate corroboration of Cohne's testimony
in the crucial meeting would be this guy Weiselberg. Weisenberger
is his name, who prosecutors could have immunized give. I mean,
they could have given him immunity in this case, and
they could have called him. The only reason they wouldn't
(11:37):
call him is because they know he would have testified
that Coohne lied about the meeting, and at that point,
after the disaster that was Cone, they weren't going to
make it an any worse than it was, which is
why I mean, they are just they are just fixated
on trying to rehabilitate and then just totally dismissed their
own witnesses in this case.
Speaker 2 (11:59):
I don't think I've ever seen a case like this
in my life. It's unbelievable.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
It's, you know, trying to say in twenty fifteen and
meeting a Trump Tower was a subversion of democracy, and
the judge is going to let that in as if
it has any relevance in this case.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
It does not.
Speaker 1 (12:17):
Now back to earlier in the day, Todd Blanche, you know,
offering closing arguments for the defense and rightly just pointing
out President Trump's innocent, He didn't commit any crimes. The
DA did not meet the burden of proof. That should
be the end of it. And here's the saddest part
of all of this to me, after talking to so
many people that have been watching the case in the
(12:39):
courtroom and their observations of the jury. I mean, I'll
refer to Matt Gates. There's six to eight people on
that jury. He thinks that would convict Donald Trump for
killing Jimmy Hoffa. Oh, I don't like the odds in
that case. So I can't tell you what outcome to expect,
but you better expect the worst in this case, in
(12:59):
this court room with this judge that is a bidened downer.
I mean, it's simple basic common sense by New York law.
He should have recused himself. He didn't recuse himself. You know,
as the defense pointed out, they should want more than
Michael Kohne and demand more than the testimony of Keith Davidson,
(13:21):
an attorney who was trying to, in their words, extort money.
He says, the consequence is simple, it's a not guilty verdict.
This case is about documents, and we seem to forget
that part. In other words, it's a paper case. It's
not about an encounter which Stormy Daniels eighteen years ago
that she repeatedly denied ever happened, including as late as
(13:43):
January of twenty eighteen. It's not even about a non
disclosure agreement of eight years ago. The charges are about
whether or not Donald Trump had anything to do with
payments to Cone on his personal accounting ledger. And the
answer is the bookings were accurate. No, no intent to defraud,
and intent is part of the law, not that I
think the judge will bring that up and make it
(14:06):
as conspicuous for this jury as he should. And no
conspiracy to influence the twenty sixteen election. And there's been
no evidence to prove that there was. Case closed. Not guilty,
but you can't count on that. I cannot emphasize how
shocking this is at the desperation of the prosecution in
(14:27):
this case. I mean that they are now trying to
defend Kohne. And don't get me wrong, Cone made his bed.
A few jurors just shook their head at the prosecutor.
I'm told by people in the courtroom. Jurors are yawning now,
very in the weeds. Hard to follow But how spectacular
is this. You have the closing arguments of the prosecuting
(14:50):
prosecution admitting that Michael Cone committed grand larceny and they
knew about it, they didn't charge him with it, then
justifying him selling merchandise. You can't blame him because he
has only this connection to sell. He's portraying Cone like
he's selling goods on the street to support his family
to live in Trump a Trump condo, and he's making
(15:13):
what four and a half million dollars between the podcast,
the books, and the merch Really, that's what they're saying.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Wow, I've never seen anything like this. He never stops
working for the good of a country.
Speaker 1 (15:37):
Sean Hannity with behind the scenes information on today's breaking news.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
Hannity is on right now twenty five to the top
of the hour.
Speaker 1 (15:48):
I have a lot of economic news I probably won't
get to today in light of closing arguments ongoing in
the Trump trial of New York. But none of the
economic news is any good.
Speaker 2 (15:58):
None of it.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
A lot of you know, oh, firsthand, you're struggling with
everyday bills. Everything is more expensive than ever. I mean,
it's unbelievable. About twelve grand more than you were spending
four years ago for the exact same stuff. Now, if
you do own a home, I want you to consider
getting a free no obligation consultation from our friends at
Americanfinancing dot net I because interest rates now are are
(16:22):
far lower than they've been in a long time, and
compared especially to credit card interest rates twenty one percent plus. Well,
they're able to save their customers an average of eight
hundred and fifty four bucks a month. That's like a
ten thousand dollars a year raise. And they do it
by tapping into their homes equity. It wipes out high
(16:42):
interest card debt. You know, average home prices in the
last year up eight point seven percent. Okay, there's real
money there that you could tap into anyway. That is
a fortune. And credit card interest rates are insane and
if you're carrying a balanced month to month, you're never
going to pay it off. American Finance and can help
you take care of that. And maybe if you're ending
each month in the red, they'll get you into the
(17:04):
black real quick. If you call today for your free
noow obligation consultation, you may even you know, miss a
mortgage payment or two legally, call eight sixty six sixty
one five ninety two hundred eighty sixty six sixty one
five ninety two hundred on the Webitsamericanfinancing dot.
Speaker 3 (17:20):
Net NMLS twenty two three three four animalis Consumer access
dot org. If you ever rds in the five started
six point seven x nine percent for well qualified borrows,
called eight sixty six one five ninety two hundred for
details about credit cost.
Speaker 1 (17:28):
In terms I cannot get over that you have the
prosecution for in this case. And we've just gone over
all the reasons, you know from the beginning, how conflicted
they were, and the judges conflicted in this case. But
then literally just you know, dismissing Michael Cohne's admission he
(17:51):
stole from Donald Trump. He could call it larceny, whatever
term legal term is justified in this case, but anyway,
and then justifying him selling all this merchandise and saying.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
You can't blame him, You can't blame him.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
If Donald Trump was was responsible for this, would you
blame him? I mean, he's literally, you know, we're not
talking about a guy that's living on the streets in
New York. He's living in a multimillion dollar Trump condo,
and he struggles, you know what, we made four and
a half million dollars on his books and his podcast
(18:30):
and his merch as the as the prosecution even admits, Oh,
there's nothing wrong with telling merchandise, you know, selling merchandise
on Trump.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
You can't blame them. What do you mean?
Speaker 1 (18:41):
You can't blame them? And he has an outcome in
this case. He has a bias in this case. That's
why it's relevant.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
You know.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
Then he of course belittles his past perjury and he says,
you know, well, he has a little problem with taking responsibility.
That's your answer. This is your means of rehabilitating your
star witness in this case. This is what they're now offering,
an excuse that's okay to light to Congress, light to
a court, light to your family, light to your client,
(19:12):
based on what your own testimony said. I mean, it's
pretty unbelievable. You know, let's just forget about the larceny
and the perjury and the convictions and the admissions. Let's
just move straight to the convicting Trump and that we're
going to use him as your star witness. But we
don't need him. There's a mountain of other evidence that
they have yet to identify. One thing Andy McCarthy pointed
(19:35):
out is the DA in New York just made up
a property right supposedly vested in the voting public to
politically damaging information about candidates. And he said, this is
important on the intent to defraud, because there's no fraud
unless there's a deceptive scheme to deprive someone of some
property right. Well, that's Bragg making up his own version
(19:56):
of federal campaign finance law, in which any expense which
is intended to influence the outcome of the election, no
matter whether the expense would have existed independent of the
campaign as a campaign expenditure, the triggers the FEC. Again,
I go back. The FFEC didn't act on any allegations here.
They didn't find any wrongdoing, Nor did Biden's weaponize DOJ,
(20:19):
nor did the SDNY, nor did Bragg's predecessor and originally
brag himself until he was embarrassed into bringing this case.
And then of course the third highest ranking Justice Department
official under Biden brought in to argue this case. Let's
leave my prestigious position of the DOJ, and maybe that
will result in me getting a promotion down the line.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
Who knows. But this is not the law.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
And this is why Bradley Smith, former FEC chair, his
testimony was crucial. And of course he was only going
to be able to testify on a limited basis.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
But if he was free to testify on the law.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
In a court of law, being a you know, it
would put a whole different take on this case. It's
pretty amazing, you know. Or the prosecutor in this case,
stressing Cone, pled guilty to the crime committed to Trump's direction. Okay,
the defense objection was overruled. Just like everything else, this
(21:19):
judge is trying to throw their way. It's just the
most unbelievable thing I've ever seen. I mean, the judge
in the final days, based on the disaster. You know,
Donald Trump was trying to subvert democracy. Well, they're attempting
to subvert democracy here, and they're willing to make up,
(21:41):
you know, new case law that doesn't exist and come
up with a novel legal theory to do it. You know,
there are two things that he expects the jury must
find relating to the documents. The documents contained false centuries
that Trump acted with intent to defraud. He said, the
records are not false. They were labeled as a business expense.
He's correct, there was no intent to defraud. Nor is
(22:05):
a catch and kill operation illegal, nor is a NDA illegal.
And unless you prove an intent to defraud. Is a
whole host of reasons why somebody might sign an NDA.
One might be just be the sheer cost to one's family,
let's start there, which is believable. And that again, the
burden of proof is on the prosecution in the case.
(22:29):
You know, Blanche pulled out invoices and bouchers. You know that,
you know, create the voucher based on what they knew
on the at the time. And he says the info
on the checks was auto inputed by the invoices and
the vouchers. Not a single invoice was ever sent to
Donald Trump, And there's no recollection that the invoices were
(22:49):
staple to the checks at all, and it was the
general practice of the Trump organization. But there's there's no
evidence that that that anybody ever brought forward in this case.
I can't tell you how many times I have my
accountants sent me something to sign and I'm like, okay,
I'll sign it. They just you know, you count on
people to do this. Why do you think Weiselberg was
(23:11):
never called in this case because he would have contradicted
everything Cone said and that case would have been close shut,
and the prosecution chose not to bring him. You know,
Blanch showed a twenty seventeen May email from Cone to Weiselberg.
He says, the government wants the jury to believe in
a conspiratorial agreement to falsify the records that Cone was
(23:31):
working for free, but that contradicts to Cone in his
own testimony, and Macone said that he did this of
his own volition and told members of the press he
did it of his own volition without the knowledge of Trump.
Lance said that the email that you can see con
asked Weiselberg to call based on where Cone was doing
for Trump. Lance, you know, it's unbelievable. And you know,
(23:57):
as earlier in this by the defense that cloeeing argull
what Cone told you on the witness stand is not true.
Lance continued, there's no evidence President Trump knew anything about
this voucher's system. There's not been a shred of evidence presented,
not a single word of it. Then he discussed the
DJT trust. When Trump became quotas calling you know it,
(24:21):
you know matters because initially he wanted to pay Cone
out of his trust et cetera, et cetera. But Trump
wasn't running the Trump organization at the time. Remember he
had to give that up at the time. It's unbelievable,
you know, it's uh, it's really unbelievable. Lance then gets
to the underlying quote so called crime and laying out
(24:43):
that a conspiracy to influence the election. Well, that's true,
that's called trying to win an election. It's not sufficient
to find there was an attempt to commit a crime
in this case. Yours must find that there were unlawful means,
actually said, I expect prosecutors will say that unlawful means
were established through either campaign finance violations, tax violations, or
(25:06):
books or records violations. Then he just tore apart the
whole Stormy Daniel's issue, says, you know, it was already
published in twenty eleven. She had denied it multiple times.
How could it at that point influence the twenty sixteen election.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
What a great point. It's unreal.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Lance says, Stormy went public because Larry Flint was will
in a pair legal fees Lance says the recording between
Conan Davidson and Davidson calls the payment settlers remorse. Blan
says Stormy was able to get out of the NBA,
write a book, have a podcast. He says it started
out as extortion and ended very well for Stormy. You know, unbelievable.
(25:53):
Blanch says Costello testified last week and said Cone told
him Trump did not know about the payment to Stormy.
Bland said that this is another example of Cone taking
the stand and quote lying his words. He continues, I
don't know how many lies are enough lies to reject
Cone's testimony. You know, he's the gloat, the greatest liar
(26:14):
of all time. Was pretty devastating. Then he did ten
things that I thought were very effective. He laid out
ten reasons for reasonable doubt. One invoices created by Cone
accurate and Trump had no intent to defraud. No evidence
Trump knew the invoices were sent. No evidence, that's reasonable doubt.
Any testimony of Cone is reasonable doubt too, but put
(26:37):
that aside. He says that February fourteen, twenty seventeen, vouchers
no evidence Trump saw anything that this person uh tarisof
who testified did with the vouchers three. No evidence of intent,
which is part of the law to defraud the ten
ninety nine issue Trump tweeted and submitted to all of
(27:00):
government ethics here ready they didn't defraud it for no
intent to unlawfully influence the twenty sixteen election. And he says,
you'll have to prove a conspiracy of unlawful means. The
Federal Election Campaign Act must willfully violate the FECA, and
that is no evidence of willfully violating that or tax laws.
(27:24):
Weiselberg says, you know, well, gross up. No evidence of
improper handling by Trump. No evidence of falsifying business records.
No falsification of business records it was labeled as a
legal expense. No evidence that Donald Trump knew anything, which
is key and critical to the paragraph that.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
Says you must show intent.
Speaker 1 (27:48):
No evidence of your illegal effort to influence the twenty
sixteen election. Oh okay, because how would you prove that
when everybody knew about it twenty eleven? No evidence, you know,
ami would have? You know, the story that Trump had
fathered this other child, which was completely false and debunk
shows that, you know, when people make false allegations, oftentimes
(28:11):
people pay for them. That ought to make people sympathetic
to people that you know are in that situation. Stormy
had already gone public. McDougal didn't want the story to
go public. She wanted her career to continue. That's where
she made the deal with Ami. Government made mistakes with
presenting evidence Malania's text to Cone asking him to call Trump,
(28:35):
but no evidence of a phone call text between Cone
and Schiller about the fourteen year old harassing them. Cone's
phone sink, no evidence you know, on the device used
for sink or wiping sinking. How can you trust the
recording between Cone and Trump as reliable? And by the way,
(28:56):
they didn't hear the whole recording. And then he ended
with Michael Cone is the human embodiment of reasonable doubt.
He'd lie to you repeatedly. He is biased, he is motivated.
And then the president's attorney said, the kind of witness
you want is one to tell the truth. Wow, this
(29:19):
is what's going on in the courtroom today. But I
go back to where I started, and nothing in this trial. Nothing,
you know, an expired crime, statute of limitations have run out,
the mysterious secondary crime you know, and a lying witness
(29:39):
who turns out to also be a thief. I mean,
that's that just sums it all up, which is why
it's it's kind of shocking to hear it and see it.
But they really don't have any choice but to try
and rehabilitate the damage done by both Cone and Stormy Daniels.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
It really is, you know.
Speaker 1 (29:59):
And then I guess they'll go on with four hours
of closing arguments from the prosecution. But you do have
this missing witness, and that being Weiselberg, which the prosecution
didn't call because he would not confirm what Cone said,
and I would have probably ended the case even for
(30:19):
the moment. And by the way, they rightly said, this
isn't about Trump, and thus jury promised they wouldn't make
it about Trump.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
Good luck with that part.
Speaker 1 (30:29):
Unbelievable and making up a fraud crime with no evidence.
Speaker 2 (30:35):
That's what's been going on here. Unbelievable.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
You know, if you worry about, you know, equal justice,
equal application of our laws, Well, this is a sad
day in the United States of America. Regardless of the outcome.
You can't make the case that Donald Trump got a
fair trial in New York. It's like in the civil
case were the eighteen million dollars, No, it's not, it's
(31:03):
or it's closer to a billion. And the judge stood
by that, stands by that and was able to get
away with that. How do you possibly get get there?
You know them the prosecutors defending Michael Cohne's phone records.
He's really defensive about Michael Cohne. The call between David
Pecker and Trump makes it impossible to claim that Cone
(31:26):
acted independently. Where's the evidence to prove what happened in that?
Where is the evidence there? Where's the mountain of evidence
that they say exists beyond Michael Cone doesn't exist. One
thing that there is evidence for is that the mission
of Preborn to offer free forty ultrasounds to expecting moms
has an impact on people's hearts and minds.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
Linda, The ward's one.
Speaker 3 (31:50):
Of those things where it's just one of those those
amazing organizations that's doing something that nobody else is doing.
And we all have a lot of responsibility. We all
have a lot of things we got to pay for.
We're in a bid economy. We don't have two nickels
to rub together. But if you do, and if you can,
please know that you're saving a life. It's twenty eight
dollars for one ultrasound. If you can afford more than one,
just know with every twenty eight dollars you are saving
(32:11):
another life. So we just ask you to go to
your phone, hit pound two fifty, enter the keyword baby.
You literally will not regret this. You are saving a life.
There is no greater deed that you can do for
your country, for God, for yourself. Trust me, it's better
than any Starbucks you're gonna buy any time in the
near future.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
All right, pound two fifty keyword baby, pound two fifty
keyword baby. On the web, it's preborn dot com slash
Shawn Sea n preborn dot com slash Sean.
Speaker 3 (32:42):
Ell Aria.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
You're help now say my name Sean Hannity.
Speaker 3 (32:47):
You're damn right, and this is the Sean Hannity Show.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
All right, Well we come back.
Speaker 1 (32:57):
I know, Greg Jarrett and to Severino and Leo two
point on Terrell's you know, I'm sure they have a
lot to say. Everybody I've been watching is just like
a gas that what has been happening the court is
in our recess. But we'll go through the day's events
and try to get you up to speed on everything
I know it gets complicated and hard. We'll have full
(33:19):
complete legal coverage. People that were in the courtroom. We
have four of them on Hannity tonight nine Eastern on
the Fox News Channel. We'll tell you more about that
as we continue your calls, We'll try and get in
as many as we can. Eight one hundred nine to
four one shown our number.
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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.