March 31, 2026 • 31 mins
Sean Hannity delivers a forceful second hour focused on what he calls the unraveling of NATO, as key European allies refuse to support U.S. operations against Iran. He breaks down the growing frustration from the Trump administration, highlighting decisions by countries like Spain and others to deny airspace and military access during a critical moment. Hannity argues that decades of imbalance—where the U.S. funds the majority of NATO defense—are now being exposed in real time.
He also dives deeper into the Iran conflict, explaining why preventing a nuclear-armed Iran remains the central objective and why short-term economic pain is worth long-term global security. Through interviews and analysis, Hannity makes the case that Europe’s inaction could mark a turning point in global alliances. The hour expands into broader concerns about national security, energy independence, and America’s role on the world stage. His message is clear: if allies won’t stand with us, America may have to stand alone.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Our two Sean Hannity show toll free. It is eight
hundred and nine four one Shawn if you want to
be a part of the program. So the President will
finish the work that he started as it relates to
the threat that is a nuclear armed Iran. In the process,
we have discovered that NATO allies are absolutely pathetically useless
(00:23):
and it's frustrating and it's unnecessary. We've seen it with
Macron and France. We've seen it with Spain, We've seen
it with now Italy. Great Britain has been pathetic. I
think a lot of this comes from internal political pressure
in most of these European countries. They have absolutely abandoned
their national security and defense needs on their own. They
(00:48):
have been reluctant and resistant to be being good NATO
allies and partners, never wanted to pay their fair share.
Now they are beginning to harden their resistance in terms
of even keeping open the straight of hor moves anyway.
The President told the UK, for example, buy your oil
from America or you open the straight of horror moves.
(01:10):
And Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, said the straight
of horr Moves is going to open one way or
the other warning the Iranians of real consequences, and you know,
on the other side of it, President Trump saying, well,
we really don't need the straight for ourselves. We're energy
dominant and energy independent, and you know, we'll get our
own oil, and the President saying, you get your own oil. Yeah,
(01:32):
there's going to be this temporary disruption which has raised
the price of a gallon of gasoline. Nobody likes it.
I don't like it, You don't like it. But here's
the question you have to ask for the short term,
is it worth it to prevent handing off an America
under the threat of a nuclear armed Iran with long
(01:52):
range intercontinental ballistic missiles. I think it's kind of a
no brainer. Now here's the Secretary of State Marco Rubio
calling out Spain other NATO countries for denying the US
use of their bases.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
Listen, I think it was very disappointing you have this
and again, look, the President and our country will have
to re examine all of this after this operation is over.
But one of the reasons why NATO is beneficial to
the United States is it gives us basing rights for contingencies.
It allows us to station troops and aircraft and weapons,
and in parts of the world that we would normally
(02:28):
have bases, and that includes in much of Europe. And
to see that in the time of need, the United
States has identified a grave risk to our national security
and our national interests and we needed to conduct this operation.
And we have countries like Spain, a NATO member that
we are pledged to defend, denying us the use of
their airspace and bragging about it, denying us the use
of their bases. And there are other countries that have
(02:49):
done that as well. And so you ask yourself, well,
what is in it for the United States?
Speaker 3 (02:53):
What is in it for the United States?
Speaker 1 (02:54):
Now, if you want some numbers, an explanation in terms
of national defense spending for the US in NATO and
put it in context and the aggregate total defense expenditures
when we talk about personnel, equipment, operations, research, development, et cetera.
You know, twenty twenty five NATO total defense spending estimates
(03:16):
range from one point four trillion to one point six trillion,
and the US share is close to a trillion of that,
a little shy of that, about nine hundred and eighty
billion dollars. And you know that equals roughly sixty two
percent of the NATO wide total. Let me let me
interpret that for you. That means that NATO is nothing
(03:38):
without the United States, and as they now have allowed
their defenses to deteriorate over decades, as they have embraced
radical socialism and climate alarmism, as they have allowed unfettered
illegal immigration without assimilation, resulting in Sharia courts in Great
Britain and no go zones in France and other parts
(04:00):
of Europe. I think they're looking at a voting constituency
and factoring in what the domestic cost would be if
the if these respective countries pledged to help us, in fact,
where to get involved in any way.
Speaker 3 (04:16):
And meanwhile, you know, all.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
These countries, they're the ones that need the energy from
the straight of Horror moves, not the US anyway. James Robbins,
former Special assistant to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and Institute of
World Politics Dean Welcome to the program. Thanks for being
with us. I don't blame Secretary of State Rubio for
(04:38):
viscerating Spain and other NATO allies, so called allies, you know,
for denying the US military their airspace and then boasting
about it. There will be a price to pay. I know,
Donald Trump, I've known them for thirty years. There's going
to be a price to pay.
Speaker 4 (04:53):
Well, Sean, you're absolutely right. I think President Trump is
when he says, go get your own oil, he's trying
to help them clarify their thinking. You know, they have
to look at the long term on this. By saying
that we don't have your back on this particular fight.
The US secures freedom of navigation globally and has since
World War Two. I mean that's been a job that
we have taken on and they have benefited from that,
(05:15):
you know, even beyond the Atlantic Alliance. And now when
the Strait is closed, they can't get their oil and
they're saying, well, you know what, we're not even going
to help you, even with overfly rights or even with
basing rights. Well, you know, they have to think about
the bigger picture because that could mean an end of NATO.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
Well, they're not thinking about the bigger picture. I honestly
think this is the end of NATO. How do you
come back from this? Well, they're unreliable partners and allies,
and we pay the bulk of money is to defend them.
Speaker 4 (05:44):
Well, It's really difficult because the question keeps coming up,
and it came up at the recent NATO conference. What
exactly are we defending in NATO? We have the shared
history with Europe, we have the shared culture with Europe. Okay,
all of that is the past and to an extent,
the present. But then when you look at like you said,
the domestic questions that, well, maybe they're not helping us
(06:08):
out with Iran because of their own immigrant population or
the direction that their countries are going, well, that says
a lot about Europe's future. And so if we wanted
to defend the Europe of the past, that's fine, but
we have to look forward. Is the Europe of the
future something that the United States wants to continue to
make an investment and in terms of defending it?
Speaker 1 (06:25):
But they have been now in a in a decades
long decline in terms of their values, have they not?
Speaker 3 (06:31):
They have not.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
They have not upped the ante in terms of their
commitment to the next generation of weaponry. They're not doing
it as individual countries, they're not doing it as a continent,
as a as a whole. They've all had this unfettered,
unvetted illegal immigration, no assimilation mandates at all. And and again,
did you ever think in your lifetime you'd have close
(06:52):
to one hundred sharia courts in Great Britain or no
go zones in in Europe and in France and other countries.
Speaker 3 (07:01):
I never thought i'd see that.
Speaker 4 (07:03):
Oh no, it's crazy. I mean when you have something,
you know, in Britain where the ruling party is saying
that that rural Britain is too white, you know, for example,
like they're you know, the immigrants are all focused in
the cities, but you got to like somehow spread them
out in the countryside, you know, to enrich it with diversity.
I mean, well, you know, if that's still going to
be England. Again, this raises the question of what exactly
(07:26):
are we defending in the Atlantic Alliance? Is it our
market access? You know, what the heck is it? We
knew what it was in the Cold War, we were
defending them against you know, communist aggression from the Soviet Union,
But you know, we don't exactly know what it is now.
And so when when the Europeans do things like this
and just don't back us up, it just raises these
(07:47):
questions again. I mean, they are they are really losing
the bubble in terms of if they want to preserve NATO,
they really need to step up on this because this
is more of their fight. The horn moose fight is
much more of their fight, and it was Iran that
dragged him into it. Cure Starmer's saying that we're not
going to be dragged in. Iran illegally escalated the war
by attacking neutral countries, attacking civilian shipping and closing an
(08:12):
international waterway. That wasn't US that did it.
Speaker 5 (08:14):
That was Iran.
Speaker 4 (08:15):
And so if the Europeans don't see that as a
threat to their self interest, not to mention the fact
that Iron lied about the range of their missiles and
you know, lied about their nuclear program, if they don't
see all this as a threat to them personally, but
forget us, it's a threat to them and they need
to step up.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Well, I think you just alluded to something that came
out of this conflict that we didn't expect, and that
is well, it shouldn't really surprise anybody because international organizations
have always underestimated where the Iranians are militarily, and we've
learned that they have much longer range ballistic missiles than
(08:53):
we had thought and guess what Iran can now with
the range they currently have with their missile systems. They
can reach Paris, they can reach London. You don't have
the ability yet to reach the US as far as
I can see. However, you know, if they get those
booster rockets. Gordon Cheng was on the program talking about
these yesterday, they are well on their way to intercontinental
(09:17):
ballistic missiles, which then gets to the core of why
the President made this decision in the beginning was the
sixty percent enriched uranium that they have, which could be
turned into weapons grade uranium in ninety day I'm sorry,
an eleven days or so, anywhere between seven and eleven days,
which would mean they'd have ballistic intercontinental ballistic missiles and
(09:40):
eleven nuclear warheads. They're not within range of this country,
but they are within range of these these so called
NATO allies, Oh for sure.
Speaker 4 (09:48):
When you look at Oran space program, for example, where
they were setting up satellites, I mean, there's a very
little difference between an ICBM and a rocket that can
launch a satellite. In fact, if you look at the
origins of our space program, it was very connected to
our nuclear program. So Ron was going down that same road,
and the UN inspectors already had found that Iran was
(10:11):
working on nuclear capable warheads. Well, why would they be
working on nuclear capable warheads if they had nothing to
put in them. So this threat has really been downplayed
by the people who just want to ignore it or say,
you know, it doesn't matter, or didn't want to see
this conflict roup, or who thought that things like the
Obama JCPOA agreement was going to stop it, which it wasn't.
(10:34):
I mean, eventually this had to happen, And Okay, it's
happening now, and whether or not the Europeans like it,
it is happening, and they need to get in on it.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
All right, quick break, we'll come right back more on
the other side. James Robbins for More, Special Assistant to
Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and the Institute of World Politics, Dean
More on NATO Operation Epic Fury. What needs to happen
to wind this all down? On the other side? Eight
hundred and ninety four one, Shawn, our number. If you
want to be a part of the program, have you.
Speaker 5 (11:08):
Ever ready to get out of the media spin room?
Speaker 6 (11:12):
You've come to the right place. Is the Sean Hannity Show.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
All right, we continue now.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
James Robbins is with us discussing another failure and frankly,
the complete meltdown of the NATO Alliance as a result
of the absolute distrust that now European ally I used
to have instilled in every American and especially me. I've
had it with these people. As far as I'm concerned,
they should be on their own. Well, I can't. I
(12:09):
can't see that this is going to end well for them.
I just can't. I mean, Donald Trump, Look, he was
very very clear in what he said. He added, the
UK had to learn to fight for themselves and the
US won't be there to help them anymore. That's a
pretty clear indication that he's separating himself from NATO and
the NATO Alliance.
Speaker 4 (12:30):
You know, I think so we saw this kind of
flurry of activity about a week or two ago when
they were like sending some ships in the Mediterranean. They
were having discussions about how they could do something, and
then that all kind of faded out, and now we're getting,
you know, denial of basing and overflight rights. They have
to know that Donald Trump is serious. He's always been
a serious guy. If he's talking this way, he's intending something,
(12:53):
and Secretary of Rubio saying we're going to reexamine everything afterwards.
That debate was already going on. That's already a strong
debate and Republican party. So the Europeans, I think they
still have a chance to respond. But if they just
set this one out, it's going to end badly for them.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
I think it's too little, too late to be very
blunt and very honest at this particular point, I don't
see how they recover. Let's get to what needs to happen.
As both the President and the Secretary of State have indicated,
this is now coming to a quick end. It seems
to me that there are certain things that are going
to have to happen. One is, whatever nuclear material or
(13:32):
enriched uranium they have at sixty percent will have to
be either handed over or taken. I hope it would
be the former, not the latter. The strait of for
moves would have to be opened up, and probably the
President would prefer to leave Ran a little better than
he found it with some type of commitment, although I
don't think it's his top priority that they stop killing
(13:54):
their own people.
Speaker 4 (13:55):
Well, yeah, that would be. It'd be great if they
had a revolution, if they had a popular epport. I
think that's the only way we're going to get a
guarantee on any of this. The Iranians, you know, whoever
we're negotiating with, and there seem to be multiple power
centers over there. They can sign an agreement.
Speaker 5 (14:11):
Will they live up to it.
Speaker 4 (14:12):
I doubt it. How will we verify and and force it?
I don't know. But we have to stand by what
we said that they can't have a nuclear program, they
have to restrict their missile program, the strait has to
be reopened, and you know, they have to be good citizens,
stop supporting these insurgency groups around the world, stop being
the leading supporter of proism. I'm surprised they haven't just
(14:33):
signed off on all that and said sure, we agree,
you know, and then betray it later. But so long
as we're negotiating with them, you know, they're going to
keep fighting. I think they think if they survive at all,
that it's a win for them. So I'd love to
see the Iranian people take matters into their own hands.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
It's kind of hard to understand the mindset that you
watch the warning for Midnight Hammer. You watch the warning
for Epic Fury, you saw the results of ignoring those warnings.
Now they're being warned again that everything is going to
be destroyed. And yet why is that even a question?
And I guess the fourth or fifth tier leadership, you
would think they would have learned something.
Speaker 4 (15:10):
You know, at some level, you're going to find someone
who would rather live. You know, find somebody who would
just say, you know what, maybe living in peace with
our neighbors, maybe having prosperity is better than what we got.
And like the President said, hopefully we can find that person.
I don't think we've found them yet, but eventually, someone
like that has got to stand up and say, hey,
why are we doing all this? Why are we a
(15:32):
leading source of pass in the world. Why can't we
just have a normal country and just live in peace?
Speaker 1 (15:37):
Well, you would hope. So I hope it ends quickly
and successfully and the Iranians no longer will be a
nuclear threat, and then it's going to be up to
the people of Iran to do what they think is necessary.
That has never been our goal regime change, although the
regime has changed not once, twice, three times, maybe four
or five times, by this point, I can't actually keep
(15:57):
up or count anyway.
Speaker 3 (15:59):
We really shit you being with us.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
James Robbins eight hundred and nine four one, Shawn, if
you want to be a part of the program standing
(16:23):
up for what's right with America, we're back on the
Sean Hannity Show. Uh okay, let's get to our busy phones.
Doug Upstate New York on the Sean Hannity Show. What's up, Doug?
How are you glad you called?
Speaker 3 (16:36):
Sir?
Speaker 4 (16:36):
How are you Today's Sarah?
Speaker 3 (16:38):
I'm good? What's going on?
Speaker 7 (16:40):
So?
Speaker 4 (16:40):
Yeah, we were in Atlanta Airport picking my son up
from Fort Benning, Georgia, and the ICE agents were all
throughout the airport in.
Speaker 5 (16:48):
The Lorenes, keeping the lines moving.
Speaker 4 (16:49):
They were friendly, personable.
Speaker 7 (16:52):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
They're not the monsters that the media and social media
portrays them out to be.
Speaker 7 (16:57):
And they were busy.
Speaker 4 (16:57):
They weren't just standing there doing nothing. We just we
appreciate them and everything they do.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
You know, most people are like you. The only people,
the only lunatics that are not are the radical left,
and they're the ones that call them Gestapo, Nazi, fascist
and murderers and all this. They're the ones that want
to defund them. I mean, you know, I'm reading a
lot about the upcoming election, and there's too much that's
going to happen between now and November to really begin
(17:28):
the narrative, the conversation. But I'm going to tell you
what it's going to come down to. The Left is insane.
They're radicalized. They don't want to fund ice. They're perfectly
okay calling them Gestapo and Nazis and fascist. They don't
want to fund the police. They want defund dismantled, no
bail laws. They want open borders, they want sanctuary cities
(17:50):
and states. They sat silently as murderers and rapists and
child molesters and other violent criminals, terrorists known terrorists or
out into this country. They voted for the largest tax
increase in history. They're the party that wants windmills and
doesn't want us to be energy dominant. They're the party
(18:11):
that just hates Donald Trump twenty four to seven. So
if if you know, people are taking hope that somehow,
the crazy, insane, radicalized left in this country that we're
out there protesting all weekend is their future. It may
be their future, but it's the end of America as
we know it if they ever got power. So you know,
(18:32):
I am not where others are in terms of being
nervous anyway, Doug, appreciate your man. Eight hundred and ninety
four one Shawn Jim and Pennsylvania Jim. How are you
glad you called?
Speaker 7 (18:44):
How are you today, mister Annedy, I'm good, sir.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
What's going on?
Speaker 7 (18:48):
Well, I was listening the other day and we hear
a lot of talk about these new Kings rallies and
the three point something billion chairleon that was spent to
finance them. So my question is is that money being
spent in the United States? Are they then?
Speaker 3 (19:02):
I would assume so?
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Or are you saying is the source of that money
from inside the US?
Speaker 7 (19:08):
Well, I'm going to talk about the what was spent
on the US because I'm thinking, would those people protesting
no Kings then be benefiting those said Kings with their
tax dollars and the money they're spending in the United States?
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Well maybe in a sense, I mean I can I'm
not sure where you're going with this.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
What do you mean?
Speaker 7 (19:28):
Well, I'm curious about the money that was spent and
the three point somewhat billion that was used and trickled
down through to finance these protests. That money was spent
in the United States, therefore that money should be taxed
as income for the receivers. Therefore that tax money would
then go to benefit these said kings that they're protesting against,
would it not.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
Well, you do know that they're usually funneled through quote,
charitable organizations, political organizations, etc. So I'm not sure what
the exact tax ramifications are depending on how the they
spend the money. If it's direct you know, if it's
money being directly handed to people, Yeah, and they don't
have an organization behind it that is that doesn't pay
(20:12):
taxes four one seed three for example, then I don't
see how they could get avoid paying taxes. But I
don't think that's the case. I think they usually hide
behind some organizational nonprofit so to speak.
Speaker 7 (20:27):
That's a shame. I was hoping that there was a
silver lining in this somewhere because I'm just I'm not
on the committed conservative my whole life, the whole family,
and I see this kind of stuff and I'm just
hoping there's some way our country can benefit from that
money being spent. Since we have to spend so much
to prove them wrong.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
Now, our friend seame Is Brunner, who's been on this program,
trace two hundred and ninety four million dollars to the
official No King's two point zero partners and organizers, all
funneled through the same quote riot ink, dark money networks.
You know, I just don't know a lot about it.
I've read it, but the reality is there's a lot
(21:08):
of money that goes behind it and a lot of
people that that are This is not the organic protesting
that they would have you believe. You know, this was
a well orchestrated, well planned out, well funded, you know,
a group of radical organizations uniting together to create this
(21:31):
impression that there is a movement bigger than they are.
What's amazing about it is, you know, and we showed
some of this last night. When you actually talk to
the people that show up, there's some of the dumbest
people that I've ever heard in my life. And their
their comments are just beyond one. One is more asinine
than the other, and it makes no sense. They don't
even know why they're there, except that I guess it's
(21:53):
a good day to hang out with a bunch of
other radical leftists. I have no idea anyway, Jim, appreciate
the call eight hundred and nine four one, Sean, if
you want to be a part of the program, Marty
in my free state of Florida. Marty, how are you
glad you called?
Speaker 6 (22:08):
Hey? Thank you for taking my call, Sean. I appreciate so.
Listening to myself the last few days, in my thought
is how much of this uranium is what Obama gave him?
Is there any way to prove that? Can they say
I believe what he gave one hundred and thirty tons
of the stuff.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
I don't know that he gave uranium directly. You know
you're talking about yellow cake uranium. Look if you go,
if you go back in time, The tipping point moment
of appeasement to me was Obama's deal with the Iranians.
Obama and Biden made this deal with the Iranians where
(22:48):
they flew in cargo planes full of cash and other
currency to the tune of billions of dollars. And during
the Biden years alone, they had all of this money
that was being held worldwide and the Iranians had no
access to it, and Biden freed up that money. What
(23:08):
was that money used for? That money was used to
build out their nuclear program, their ballistic missile program to
foment terror. And they also gave them the liberty and
the freedom to continue to sell their oil on world markets,
which is the lifeblood again of their sourcing for their
(23:31):
terror funding network. So all of it combined, I would
argue lies on their shoulders. Unfortunately, but maybe fortunately, Donald
Trump inherited and I ran on the precipice of being
a nuclear power. And again I go back to the
(23:52):
tipping point. And for those that are isolationists, those that
just hate anything that Trump does, for the radical left,
I'm not really trying to appeal to them or people
that might have a disagreement, I can't convince you. However,
when you have over one thousand pounds of sixty percent
enriched uranium fourgner and sixty kilograms whichever measurement you prefer,
(24:17):
that is capable to be turned into weapons grade uranium
in seven to eleven days, and you now have ballistic
missile capability with the help of the North Koreans, that
means that in very short order they could have been
a nuclear power, and to me, that would have been
an existential threat to the United States and to the
(24:39):
entire world. So the final decision, the final nail in
the coffin, was the negotiations with Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff
and the Iranians, and they felt that it was their
inalienable right to make to have nuclear weapons and they
had no intention of giving that up, even after Midnight
(25:00):
Hammer destroyed their ability to enrich at least for the interim,
but every indication was they were reconstituting that program. But
don't kid yourself that the money that they got from Obama,
Biden and the radical left that were trying to appease
the Iranians even in that original Obama deal, they the
(25:21):
Iranians quote promised, Why you'd ever trust them, I don't know,
but they promised, And they were not allowed to build
out a nuclear program for ten years, okay, with no
and they didn't include in that deal anywhere, any place,
anytime American inspections. You know, the IAEA has historically notoriously
(25:44):
underestimated the Iranian regime's ability in terms of their nuclear capability,
their ballistic missile capability, which we learned in this most
recent conflict they had ballistic missiles with a far greater
range than had originally been, and if the North Koreans
are in fact, as Gordon Chang laid out in great
(26:05):
specificity yesterday, providing that technology and those boosters, they are
well on their way to an intercontinental ballistic missiles or
they were not anymore. That has been neutralized. Now the
last part of this operation to follow through on the
President's consistent message that they can't be a nuclear power,
(26:29):
is to get the enriched uranium.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
Now.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
They'll either do it willingly, or will degrade and absolutely
make it unretrievable, or we'll just take it. I don't
know what the options are. I'm not a nuclear scientist.
I don't know about radiological fallout. I don't know the
dangers associated with each aspect of it. I know that
(26:52):
it is not a risk that we should be taking
as a country or as a world, and that then
makes it even more profound to me how absolutely abhorrent
our NATO allies have been in.
Speaker 3 (27:07):
This entire endeavor. I honestly I.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
Think NATO is a useless, outdated alliance. After the actions
of Spain and France and Great Britain and other European countries,
I think they are europe as a continent is a
continent in a precipitous, dramatic decline, and I don't think
(27:35):
moving forward we could ever count on them to be
a real, true, effective ally to the USA. And all
we're doing is pouring good money after bad giving into
them as far as I'm concerned. Anyway, I hope that
answers your question. It's an important question you're asking. Back
to our phones eight hundred nine foot one, Sean, if
(27:56):
you want to be a part of the program. All right,
quick break right back to our busy phones eight hundred
and ninety four one, Shawn our number, if you want
to be a part of the program. As we continue,
the final hour of the Sean Hannity Show was up next,
hang on for Sean's conservative solutions. Now, let's get back
(28:47):
to our busy telephones. Eight hundred ninety four one, Sean,
if you want to be a part of the program, Eduardo,
Also in my free state of Florida.
Speaker 3 (28:55):
What's up, ed WARDO? How are you?
Speaker 5 (28:56):
Yeah? Good afternoon, Sean. Well, yeah, this is no ken
is a job. This thing my white down wind down
in April. See, these people they're now looked like the
World War two generation. They there. This is a laid
back society who wants everything. You know, gimme, gimme, gimme.
There's no sacrificial UH personality in the American people. This
(29:19):
is why the immediate just jumps on UH poll numbers
and it's pretty ridiculous. So we need to ignore that.
We got to finish this thing in Iran and then
we can deal with Things will cool in the economy.
You know, the gas will come down, the stock marketable rebound,
you name it.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
Doc market had a nice rebound today. Look, all of
this I think will happen in very short order. You know, Look,
I guess there's a part of me that can understand
those people that have been predicting, oh, this will devolve
into a forever war.
Speaker 3 (29:51):
It will not. Donald Trump won't let that happen. I can.
Speaker 6 (29:55):
I can.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
I can assure you of that.
Speaker 7 (29:58):
UH.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
And I know more than most of the people that
open their big fat mouths that don't know him, didn't
support him most of the time. If anything, they are
only intermittent supporters and that have absolutely no knowledge of anything.
So this is going to end in short order. We
have really two major issues remaining, and then things that
(30:19):
the president will do.
Speaker 3 (30:20):
His draw down.
Speaker 1 (30:21):
Israel will continue to do whatever Israel feels is in
their best national interest, and then Donald Trump will move forward.
But I can tell you the world will be a
safer place. And here's the sad part for Donald Trump
in the sense but it's a great thing for humanity,
is that if in fact he's successful and stops Ran
from ever becoming a nuclear power with their radical ideology
(30:45):
of live, free, or die, we will never history will
never record how many lives likely were saved by President
Trump's bold action. And I guess maybe that's the way
it's designed to be, but if he didn't do it,
we would know the other side of it, if they
ever got them and used them. Anyway, thanks so much
(31:08):
for being one of us.
Our two Sean Hannity show toll free. It is eight
hundred and nine four one Shawn if you want to
be a part of the program. So the President will
finish the work that he started as it relates to
the threat that is a nuclear armed Iran. In the process,
we have discovered that NATO allies are absolutely pathetically useless
(00:23):
and it's frustrating and it's unnecessary. We've seen it with
Macron and France. We've seen it with Spain, We've seen
it with now Italy. Great Britain has been pathetic. I
think a lot of this comes from internal political pressure
in most of these European countries. They have absolutely abandoned
their national security and defense needs on their own. They
(00:48):
have been reluctant and resistant to be being good NATO
allies and partners, never wanted to pay their fair share.
Now they are beginning to harden their resistance in terms
of even keeping open the straight of hor moves anyway.
The President told the UK, for example, buy your oil
from America or you open the straight of horror moves.
(01:10):
And Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, said the straight
of horr Moves is going to open one way or
the other warning the Iranians of real consequences, and you know,
on the other side of it, President Trump saying, well,
we really don't need the straight for ourselves. We're energy
dominant and energy independent, and you know, we'll get our
own oil, and the President saying, you get your own oil. Yeah,
(01:32):
there's going to be this temporary disruption which has raised
the price of a gallon of gasoline. Nobody likes it.
I don't like it, You don't like it. But here's
the question you have to ask for the short term,
is it worth it to prevent handing off an America
under the threat of a nuclear armed Iran with long
(01:52):
range intercontinental ballistic missiles. I think it's kind of a
no brainer. Now here's the Secretary of State Marco Rubio
calling out Spain other NATO countries for denying the US
use of their bases.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
Listen, I think it was very disappointing you have this
and again, look, the President and our country will have
to re examine all of this after this operation is over.
But one of the reasons why NATO is beneficial to
the United States is it gives us basing rights for contingencies.
It allows us to station troops and aircraft and weapons,
and in parts of the world that we would normally
(02:28):
have bases, and that includes in much of Europe. And
to see that in the time of need, the United
States has identified a grave risk to our national security
and our national interests and we needed to conduct this operation.
And we have countries like Spain, a NATO member that
we are pledged to defend, denying us the use of
their airspace and bragging about it, denying us the use
of their bases. And there are other countries that have
(02:49):
done that as well. And so you ask yourself, well,
what is in it for the United States?
Speaker 3 (02:53):
What is in it for the United States?
Speaker 1 (02:54):
Now, if you want some numbers, an explanation in terms
of national defense spending for the US in NATO and
put it in context and the aggregate total defense expenditures
when we talk about personnel, equipment, operations, research, development, et cetera.
You know, twenty twenty five NATO total defense spending estimates
(03:16):
range from one point four trillion to one point six trillion,
and the US share is close to a trillion of that,
a little shy of that, about nine hundred and eighty
billion dollars. And you know that equals roughly sixty two
percent of the NATO wide total. Let me let me
interpret that for you. That means that NATO is nothing
(03:38):
without the United States, and as they now have allowed
their defenses to deteriorate over decades, as they have embraced
radical socialism and climate alarmism, as they have allowed unfettered
illegal immigration without assimilation, resulting in Sharia courts in Great
Britain and no go zones in France and other parts
(04:00):
of Europe. I think they're looking at a voting constituency
and factoring in what the domestic cost would be if
the if these respective countries pledged to help us, in fact,
where to get involved in any way.
Speaker 3 (04:16):
And meanwhile, you know, all.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
These countries, they're the ones that need the energy from
the straight of Horror moves, not the US anyway. James Robbins,
former Special assistant to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and Institute of
World Politics Dean Welcome to the program. Thanks for being
with us. I don't blame Secretary of State Rubio for
(04:38):
viscerating Spain and other NATO allies, so called allies, you know,
for denying the US military their airspace and then boasting
about it. There will be a price to pay. I know,
Donald Trump, I've known them for thirty years. There's going
to be a price to pay.
Speaker 4 (04:53):
Well, Sean, you're absolutely right. I think President Trump is
when he says, go get your own oil, he's trying
to help them clarify their thinking. You know, they have
to look at the long term on this. By saying
that we don't have your back on this particular fight.
The US secures freedom of navigation globally and has since
World War Two. I mean that's been a job that
we have taken on and they have benefited from that,
(05:15):
you know, even beyond the Atlantic Alliance. And now when
the Strait is closed, they can't get their oil and
they're saying, well, you know what, we're not even going
to help you, even with overfly rights or even with
basing rights. Well, you know, they have to think about
the bigger picture because that could mean an end of NATO.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
Well, they're not thinking about the bigger picture. I honestly
think this is the end of NATO. How do you
come back from this? Well, they're unreliable partners and allies,
and we pay the bulk of money is to defend them.
Speaker 4 (05:44):
Well, It's really difficult because the question keeps coming up,
and it came up at the recent NATO conference. What
exactly are we defending in NATO? We have the shared
history with Europe, we have the shared culture with Europe. Okay,
all of that is the past and to an extent,
the present. But then when you look at like you said,
the domestic questions that, well, maybe they're not helping us
(06:08):
out with Iran because of their own immigrant population or
the direction that their countries are going, well, that says
a lot about Europe's future. And so if we wanted
to defend the Europe of the past, that's fine, but
we have to look forward. Is the Europe of the
future something that the United States wants to continue to
make an investment and in terms of defending it?
Speaker 1 (06:25):
But they have been now in a in a decades
long decline in terms of their values, have they not?
Speaker 3 (06:31):
They have not.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
They have not upped the ante in terms of their
commitment to the next generation of weaponry. They're not doing
it as individual countries, they're not doing it as a continent,
as a as a whole. They've all had this unfettered,
unvetted illegal immigration, no assimilation mandates at all. And and again,
did you ever think in your lifetime you'd have close
(06:52):
to one hundred sharia courts in Great Britain or no
go zones in in Europe and in France and other countries.
Speaker 3 (07:01):
I never thought i'd see that.
Speaker 4 (07:03):
Oh no, it's crazy. I mean when you have something,
you know, in Britain where the ruling party is saying
that that rural Britain is too white, you know, for example,
like they're you know, the immigrants are all focused in
the cities, but you got to like somehow spread them
out in the countryside, you know, to enrich it with diversity.
I mean, well, you know, if that's still going to
be England. Again, this raises the question of what exactly
(07:26):
are we defending in the Atlantic Alliance? Is it our
market access? You know, what the heck is it? We
knew what it was in the Cold War, we were
defending them against you know, communist aggression from the Soviet Union,
But you know, we don't exactly know what it is now.
And so when when the Europeans do things like this
and just don't back us up, it just raises these
(07:47):
questions again. I mean, they are they are really losing
the bubble in terms of if they want to preserve NATO,
they really need to step up on this because this
is more of their fight. The horn moose fight is
much more of their fight, and it was Iran that
dragged him into it. Cure Starmer's saying that we're not
going to be dragged in. Iran illegally escalated the war
by attacking neutral countries, attacking civilian shipping and closing an
(08:12):
international waterway. That wasn't US that did it.
Speaker 5 (08:14):
That was Iran.
Speaker 4 (08:15):
And so if the Europeans don't see that as a
threat to their self interest, not to mention the fact
that Iron lied about the range of their missiles and
you know, lied about their nuclear program, if they don't
see all this as a threat to them personally, but
forget us, it's a threat to them and they need
to step up.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Well, I think you just alluded to something that came
out of this conflict that we didn't expect, and that
is well, it shouldn't really surprise anybody because international organizations
have always underestimated where the Iranians are militarily, and we've
learned that they have much longer range ballistic missiles than
(08:53):
we had thought and guess what Iran can now with
the range they currently have with their missile systems. They
can reach Paris, they can reach London. You don't have
the ability yet to reach the US as far as
I can see. However, you know, if they get those
booster rockets. Gordon Cheng was on the program talking about
these yesterday, they are well on their way to intercontinental
(09:17):
ballistic missiles, which then gets to the core of why
the President made this decision in the beginning was the
sixty percent enriched uranium that they have, which could be
turned into weapons grade uranium in ninety day I'm sorry,
an eleven days or so, anywhere between seven and eleven days,
which would mean they'd have ballistic intercontinental ballistic missiles and
(09:40):
eleven nuclear warheads. They're not within range of this country,
but they are within range of these these so called
NATO allies, Oh for sure.
Speaker 4 (09:48):
When you look at Oran space program, for example, where
they were setting up satellites, I mean, there's a very
little difference between an ICBM and a rocket that can
launch a satellite. In fact, if you look at the
origins of our space program, it was very connected to
our nuclear program. So Ron was going down that same road,
and the UN inspectors already had found that Iran was
(10:11):
working on nuclear capable warheads. Well, why would they be
working on nuclear capable warheads if they had nothing to
put in them. So this threat has really been downplayed
by the people who just want to ignore it or say,
you know, it doesn't matter, or didn't want to see
this conflict roup, or who thought that things like the
Obama JCPOA agreement was going to stop it, which it wasn't.
(10:34):
I mean, eventually this had to happen, And Okay, it's
happening now, and whether or not the Europeans like it,
it is happening, and they need to get in on it.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
All right, quick break, we'll come right back more on
the other side. James Robbins for More, Special Assistant to
Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and the Institute of World Politics, Dean
More on NATO Operation Epic Fury. What needs to happen
to wind this all down? On the other side? Eight
hundred and ninety four one, Shawn, our number. If you
want to be a part of the program, have you.
Speaker 5 (11:08):
Ever ready to get out of the media spin room?
Speaker 6 (11:12):
You've come to the right place. Is the Sean Hannity Show.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
All right, we continue now.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
James Robbins is with us discussing another failure and frankly,
the complete meltdown of the NATO Alliance as a result
of the absolute distrust that now European ally I used
to have instilled in every American and especially me. I've
had it with these people. As far as I'm concerned,
they should be on their own. Well, I can't. I
(12:09):
can't see that this is going to end well for them.
I just can't. I mean, Donald Trump, Look, he was
very very clear in what he said. He added, the
UK had to learn to fight for themselves and the
US won't be there to help them anymore. That's a
pretty clear indication that he's separating himself from NATO and
the NATO Alliance.
Speaker 4 (12:30):
You know, I think so we saw this kind of
flurry of activity about a week or two ago when
they were like sending some ships in the Mediterranean. They
were having discussions about how they could do something, and
then that all kind of faded out, and now we're getting,
you know, denial of basing and overflight rights. They have
to know that Donald Trump is serious. He's always been
a serious guy. If he's talking this way, he's intending something,
(12:53):
and Secretary of Rubio saying we're going to reexamine everything afterwards.
That debate was already going on. That's already a strong
debate and Republican party. So the Europeans, I think they
still have a chance to respond. But if they just
set this one out, it's going to end badly for them.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
I think it's too little, too late to be very
blunt and very honest at this particular point, I don't
see how they recover. Let's get to what needs to happen.
As both the President and the Secretary of State have indicated,
this is now coming to a quick end. It seems
to me that there are certain things that are going
to have to happen. One is, whatever nuclear material or
(13:32):
enriched uranium they have at sixty percent will have to
be either handed over or taken. I hope it would
be the former, not the latter. The strait of for
moves would have to be opened up, and probably the
President would prefer to leave Ran a little better than
he found it with some type of commitment, although I
don't think it's his top priority that they stop killing
(13:54):
their own people.
Speaker 4 (13:55):
Well, yeah, that would be. It'd be great if they
had a revolution, if they had a popular epport. I
think that's the only way we're going to get a
guarantee on any of this. The Iranians, you know, whoever
we're negotiating with, and there seem to be multiple power
centers over there. They can sign an agreement.
Speaker 5 (14:11):
Will they live up to it.
Speaker 4 (14:12):
I doubt it. How will we verify and and force it?
I don't know. But we have to stand by what
we said that they can't have a nuclear program, they
have to restrict their missile program, the strait has to
be reopened, and you know, they have to be good citizens,
stop supporting these insurgency groups around the world, stop being
the leading supporter of proism. I'm surprised they haven't just
(14:33):
signed off on all that and said sure, we agree,
you know, and then betray it later. But so long
as we're negotiating with them, you know, they're going to
keep fighting. I think they think if they survive at all,
that it's a win for them. So I'd love to
see the Iranian people take matters into their own hands.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
It's kind of hard to understand the mindset that you
watch the warning for Midnight Hammer. You watch the warning
for Epic Fury, you saw the results of ignoring those warnings.
Now they're being warned again that everything is going to
be destroyed. And yet why is that even a question?
And I guess the fourth or fifth tier leadership, you
would think they would have learned something.
Speaker 4 (15:10):
You know, at some level, you're going to find someone
who would rather live. You know, find somebody who would
just say, you know what, maybe living in peace with
our neighbors, maybe having prosperity is better than what we got.
And like the President said, hopefully we can find that person.
I don't think we've found them yet, but eventually, someone
like that has got to stand up and say, hey,
why are we doing all this? Why are we a
(15:32):
leading source of pass in the world. Why can't we
just have a normal country and just live in peace?
Speaker 1 (15:37):
Well, you would hope. So I hope it ends quickly
and successfully and the Iranians no longer will be a
nuclear threat, and then it's going to be up to
the people of Iran to do what they think is necessary.
That has never been our goal regime change, although the
regime has changed not once, twice, three times, maybe four
or five times, by this point, I can't actually keep
(15:57):
up or count anyway.
Speaker 3 (15:59):
We really shit you being with us.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
James Robbins eight hundred and nine four one, Shawn, if
you want to be a part of the program standing
(16:23):
up for what's right with America, we're back on the
Sean Hannity Show. Uh okay, let's get to our busy phones.
Doug Upstate New York on the Sean Hannity Show. What's up, Doug?
How are you glad you called?
Speaker 3 (16:36):
Sir?
Speaker 4 (16:36):
How are you Today's Sarah?
Speaker 3 (16:38):
I'm good? What's going on?
Speaker 7 (16:40):
So?
Speaker 4 (16:40):
Yeah, we were in Atlanta Airport picking my son up
from Fort Benning, Georgia, and the ICE agents were all
throughout the airport in.
Speaker 5 (16:48):
The Lorenes, keeping the lines moving.
Speaker 4 (16:49):
They were friendly, personable.
Speaker 7 (16:52):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
They're not the monsters that the media and social media
portrays them out to be.
Speaker 7 (16:57):
And they were busy.
Speaker 4 (16:57):
They weren't just standing there doing nothing. We just we
appreciate them and everything they do.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
You know, most people are like you. The only people,
the only lunatics that are not are the radical left,
and they're the ones that call them Gestapo, Nazi, fascist
and murderers and all this. They're the ones that want
to defund them. I mean, you know, I'm reading a
lot about the upcoming election, and there's too much that's
going to happen between now and November to really begin
(17:28):
the narrative, the conversation. But I'm going to tell you
what it's going to come down to. The Left is insane.
They're radicalized. They don't want to fund ice. They're perfectly
okay calling them Gestapo and Nazis and fascist. They don't
want to fund the police. They want defund dismantled, no
bail laws. They want open borders, they want sanctuary cities
(17:50):
and states. They sat silently as murderers and rapists and
child molesters and other violent criminals, terrorists known terrorists or
out into this country. They voted for the largest tax
increase in history. They're the party that wants windmills and
doesn't want us to be energy dominant. They're the party
(18:11):
that just hates Donald Trump twenty four to seven. So
if if you know, people are taking hope that somehow,
the crazy, insane, radicalized left in this country that we're
out there protesting all weekend is their future. It may
be their future, but it's the end of America as
we know it if they ever got power. So you know,
(18:32):
I am not where others are in terms of being
nervous anyway, Doug, appreciate your man. Eight hundred and ninety
four one Shawn Jim and Pennsylvania Jim. How are you
glad you called?
Speaker 7 (18:44):
How are you today, mister Annedy, I'm good, sir.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
What's going on?
Speaker 7 (18:48):
Well, I was listening the other day and we hear
a lot of talk about these new Kings rallies and
the three point something billion chairleon that was spent to
finance them. So my question is is that money being
spent in the United States? Are they then?
Speaker 3 (19:02):
I would assume so?
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Or are you saying is the source of that money
from inside the US?
Speaker 7 (19:08):
Well, I'm going to talk about the what was spent
on the US because I'm thinking, would those people protesting
no Kings then be benefiting those said Kings with their
tax dollars and the money they're spending in the United States?
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Well maybe in a sense, I mean I can I'm
not sure where you're going with this.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
What do you mean?
Speaker 7 (19:28):
Well, I'm curious about the money that was spent and
the three point somewhat billion that was used and trickled
down through to finance these protests. That money was spent
in the United States, therefore that money should be taxed
as income for the receivers. Therefore that tax money would
then go to benefit these said kings that they're protesting against,
would it not.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
Well, you do know that they're usually funneled through quote,
charitable organizations, political organizations, etc. So I'm not sure what
the exact tax ramifications are depending on how the they
spend the money. If it's direct you know, if it's
money being directly handed to people, Yeah, and they don't
have an organization behind it that is that doesn't pay
(20:12):
taxes four one seed three for example, then I don't
see how they could get avoid paying taxes. But I
don't think that's the case. I think they usually hide
behind some organizational nonprofit so to speak.
Speaker 7 (20:27):
That's a shame. I was hoping that there was a
silver lining in this somewhere because I'm just I'm not
on the committed conservative my whole life, the whole family,
and I see this kind of stuff and I'm just
hoping there's some way our country can benefit from that
money being spent. Since we have to spend so much
to prove them wrong.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
Now, our friend seame Is Brunner, who's been on this program,
trace two hundred and ninety four million dollars to the
official No King's two point zero partners and organizers, all
funneled through the same quote riot ink, dark money networks.
You know, I just don't know a lot about it.
I've read it, but the reality is there's a lot
(21:08):
of money that goes behind it and a lot of
people that that are This is not the organic protesting
that they would have you believe. You know, this was
a well orchestrated, well planned out, well funded, you know,
a group of radical organizations uniting together to create this
(21:31):
impression that there is a movement bigger than they are.
What's amazing about it is, you know, and we showed
some of this last night. When you actually talk to
the people that show up, there's some of the dumbest
people that I've ever heard in my life. And their
their comments are just beyond one. One is more asinine
than the other, and it makes no sense. They don't
even know why they're there, except that I guess it's
(21:53):
a good day to hang out with a bunch of
other radical leftists. I have no idea anyway, Jim, appreciate
the call eight hundred and nine four one, Sean, if
you want to be a part of the program, Marty
in my free state of Florida. Marty, how are you
glad you called?
Speaker 6 (22:08):
Hey? Thank you for taking my call, Sean. I appreciate so.
Listening to myself the last few days, in my thought
is how much of this uranium is what Obama gave him?
Is there any way to prove that? Can they say
I believe what he gave one hundred and thirty tons
of the stuff.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
I don't know that he gave uranium directly. You know
you're talking about yellow cake uranium. Look if you go,
if you go back in time, The tipping point moment
of appeasement to me was Obama's deal with the Iranians.
Obama and Biden made this deal with the Iranians where
(22:48):
they flew in cargo planes full of cash and other
currency to the tune of billions of dollars. And during
the Biden years alone, they had all of this money
that was being held worldwide and the Iranians had no
access to it, and Biden freed up that money. What
(23:08):
was that money used for? That money was used to
build out their nuclear program, their ballistic missile program to
foment terror. And they also gave them the liberty and
the freedom to continue to sell their oil on world markets,
which is the lifeblood again of their sourcing for their
(23:31):
terror funding network. So all of it combined, I would
argue lies on their shoulders. Unfortunately, but maybe fortunately, Donald
Trump inherited and I ran on the precipice of being
a nuclear power. And again I go back to the
(23:52):
tipping point. And for those that are isolationists, those that
just hate anything that Trump does, for the radical left,
I'm not really trying to appeal to them or people
that might have a disagreement, I can't convince you. However,
when you have over one thousand pounds of sixty percent
enriched uranium fourgner and sixty kilograms whichever measurement you prefer,
(24:17):
that is capable to be turned into weapons grade uranium
in seven to eleven days, and you now have ballistic
missile capability with the help of the North Koreans, that
means that in very short order they could have been
a nuclear power, and to me, that would have been
an existential threat to the United States and to the
(24:39):
entire world. So the final decision, the final nail in
the coffin, was the negotiations with Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff
and the Iranians, and they felt that it was their
inalienable right to make to have nuclear weapons and they
had no intention of giving that up, even after Midnight
(25:00):
Hammer destroyed their ability to enrich at least for the interim,
but every indication was they were reconstituting that program. But
don't kid yourself that the money that they got from Obama,
Biden and the radical left that were trying to appease
the Iranians even in that original Obama deal, they the
(25:21):
Iranians quote promised, Why you'd ever trust them, I don't know,
but they promised, And they were not allowed to build
out a nuclear program for ten years, okay, with no
and they didn't include in that deal anywhere, any place,
anytime American inspections. You know, the IAEA has historically notoriously
(25:44):
underestimated the Iranian regime's ability in terms of their nuclear capability,
their ballistic missile capability, which we learned in this most
recent conflict they had ballistic missiles with a far greater
range than had originally been, and if the North Koreans
are in fact, as Gordon Chang laid out in great
(26:05):
specificity yesterday, providing that technology and those boosters, they are
well on their way to an intercontinental ballistic missiles or
they were not anymore. That has been neutralized. Now the
last part of this operation to follow through on the
President's consistent message that they can't be a nuclear power,
(26:29):
is to get the enriched uranium.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
Now.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
They'll either do it willingly, or will degrade and absolutely
make it unretrievable, or we'll just take it. I don't
know what the options are. I'm not a nuclear scientist.
I don't know about radiological fallout. I don't know the
dangers associated with each aspect of it. I know that
(26:52):
it is not a risk that we should be taking
as a country or as a world, and that then
makes it even more profound to me how absolutely abhorrent
our NATO allies have been in.
Speaker 3 (27:07):
This entire endeavor. I honestly I.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
Think NATO is a useless, outdated alliance. After the actions
of Spain and France and Great Britain and other European countries,
I think they are europe as a continent is a
continent in a precipitous, dramatic decline, and I don't think
(27:35):
moving forward we could ever count on them to be
a real, true, effective ally to the USA. And all
we're doing is pouring good money after bad giving into
them as far as I'm concerned. Anyway, I hope that
answers your question. It's an important question you're asking. Back
to our phones eight hundred nine foot one, Sean, if
(27:56):
you want to be a part of the program. All right,
quick break right back to our busy phones eight hundred
and ninety four one, Shawn our number, if you want
to be a part of the program. As we continue,
the final hour of the Sean Hannity Show was up next,
hang on for Sean's conservative solutions. Now, let's get back
(28:47):
to our busy telephones. Eight hundred ninety four one, Sean,
if you want to be a part of the program, Eduardo,
Also in my free state of Florida.
Speaker 3 (28:55):
What's up, ed WARDO? How are you?
Speaker 5 (28:56):
Yeah? Good afternoon, Sean. Well, yeah, this is no ken
is a job. This thing my white down wind down
in April. See, these people they're now looked like the
World War two generation. They there. This is a laid
back society who wants everything. You know, gimme, gimme, gimme.
There's no sacrificial UH personality in the American people. This
(29:19):
is why the immediate just jumps on UH poll numbers
and it's pretty ridiculous. So we need to ignore that.
We got to finish this thing in Iran and then
we can deal with Things will cool in the economy.
You know, the gas will come down, the stock marketable rebound,
you name it.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
Doc market had a nice rebound today. Look, all of
this I think will happen in very short order. You know, Look,
I guess there's a part of me that can understand
those people that have been predicting, oh, this will devolve
into a forever war.
Speaker 3 (29:51):
It will not. Donald Trump won't let that happen. I can.
Speaker 6 (29:55):
I can.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
I can assure you of that.
Speaker 7 (29:58):
UH.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
And I know more than most of the people that
open their big fat mouths that don't know him, didn't
support him most of the time. If anything, they are
only intermittent supporters and that have absolutely no knowledge of anything.
So this is going to end in short order. We
have really two major issues remaining, and then things that
(30:19):
the president will do.
Speaker 3 (30:20):
His draw down.
Speaker 1 (30:21):
Israel will continue to do whatever Israel feels is in
their best national interest, and then Donald Trump will move forward.
But I can tell you the world will be a
safer place. And here's the sad part for Donald Trump
in the sense but it's a great thing for humanity,
is that if in fact he's successful and stops Ran
from ever becoming a nuclear power with their radical ideology
(30:45):
of live, free, or die, we will never history will
never record how many lives likely were saved by President
Trump's bold action. And I guess maybe that's the way
it's designed to be, but if he didn't do it,
we would know the other side of it, if they
ever got them and used them. Anyway, thanks so much
(31:08):
for being one of us.
The Sean Hannity Show News
Host
Sean Hannity
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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.
The Clifford Show
The Clifford Show with Clifford Taylor IV blends humor, culture, and behind-the-scenes sports talk with real conversations featuring athletes, creators, and personalities—spotlighting the grind, the growth, and the opportunities shaping the next generation of sports and culture.