Senator Cruz: History Is With President Trump

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
All right, glad you with us. What a busy newsday
we have today, eight hundred and ninety four one sean
you want to be a part of this extravaganza. Crowds
massive now forming in Louisville, Kentucky, as the Grand Jury
has made its decision regarding the three officers involved in
the case of Brianna Taylor. Will go through every bit

(00:23):
of specificity involving that. Wow, what a blockbuster interim report
by Senators Ron Johnson and Senator Charles Grassley as it
relates to Hunter Biden. It's much bigger than we ever thought. Ukraine, Russia,
China and other countries as well, including specific individuals from

(00:45):
these countries. We're going to break down their their report.
It is devastating to zero experience Hunter, more money than
we even imagined. We have an update on the Supreme Court.
We've got a lot of people joining us today. Had
cruizbell O'Reilly, John Solomon, Greg Jared Peters, Fightser. You know,
first broke the whole story of Barisma and secret empires

(01:08):
and China and all these other deals. And it's just
a lot to get to. Let me first go to
the Grand jury decision through now let me well, first,
let me go through the facts of the case and
bring you up to speed in case you don't know, Um,
this is a tragedy. Through and through. What you have

(01:29):
is a person who would be considered in every way
imaginable when we say you're a great American. You know
the people of this country make this country great. That
would that defines the life of Brianna Taylor, somebody who
was an EMT, somebody who who stated who stated purpose

(01:52):
was that she wanted to serve her fellow man and women.
Obviously she wanted to serve people. It was their calling
to save lives, working not one, but two full time jobs.
It was a case where police had a no knock warrant.
They had the wrong address. This makes my blood boiled.

(02:16):
This part of the story because I've still not got
an answer even all throughout today is we've been watching,
you know, a lot going on. We have not got anyone.
Why did they have the wrong address? Now, no knock
warrant means okay, cops pull up to the door, they
banged down the door, they rushed in, and the idea
is that it might be a dangerous situation. They'll go

(02:38):
in with their guns drawn. That's part of what police
work is. It's a fairly normal procedure. But you gotta
get the right address. I mean, and I've yet to
hear who sent them to the wrong address. I don't
understand it. So so then from there, Brianna Taylor's boyfriend

(02:58):
wakes up out of a a deep sleep and then
Brianna Taylor woke up. They think that they didn't break
any laws. They didn't know it was cops. Now there
was one according to the DA who spoke later, there
was one fact that came out that there was a
civilian witness that said that they heard loudly the cops
identify themselves. That just came out today. But I'm trying

(03:21):
to give you the whole objective picture here, just what
the facts are. So there's a legal firearm that Brianna
taylor boyfriend has, thinks people broke into his house that
apparently doesn't know in his mind then said, since he
didn't know it was the police, he didn't break any laws.
He's not a drug dealer. That this this you know, um,

(03:44):
you know, no knock warrant that they had did not include,
you know, they thought it was going to be a
drug case. There no drugs in this apartment. They were
in the wrong address. We now know that as a fact.
Then one of the officers is shot. Gunfire you know,
ensues thereafter Brianna Taylors struck eight times she was in

(04:05):
the bedroom eight times. He dies. He survived. The boyfriend,
the cop was survived as well. And it is about
six months ago now a civil settlement has taken place
in this case, meaning that the city paid out the
City of Louisville. I think it was twelve thirteen fourteen
million dollars. I don't remember the exact figure off the
top of my head. And the grand jury was convened. Now,

(04:30):
the da of came out earlier today and explained that
they told all of the grand jury. Remember it in
grand jury case, that doesn't not mean you're guilty. It
means that the grand jury is deciding whether to charge
the officers in this case. And they went through all
of the possible charges for the officers involved in the case.

(04:54):
For example, you know, when an infant grand jury considers
their fate, it has an option of indicting on any
of four degrees of homicide, from reckless homicide to murder.
The twelve grand jurors were told all these options. They
were told they can also consider the charge of wanton endangerment,
deciding that one or more of the officers knowingly acted

(05:16):
in a way that created a substantial danger of death
or serious physical injury to another. Now, the panel also
could elect to return no indictment at all. Apparently for
the other two officers that was their decision. The Attorney
General Daniel Cameron could choose not to present the case
to the grand jury make the decision himself, but anyway,

(05:37):
they brought it to a grand jury. By Kentucky law,
the votes of nine of twelve grand juris are required
to return an indictment. And just giving you the background,
giving you the law here so you understand now the
four criminal homicide options that were presented to the grand
jury are murder, and that would include sentencing options even

(05:58):
including the death penalty or life without parole or life
with parole eligibility in twenty five years or twenty to
fifty years in a capital offense. That would be another
one of the four murder options. Charge of options would
be manslaughter in the first degree, that penalty class B
felony ten to twenty years, and that would be a
person is guilty of first degree manslaughter win with intent

(06:22):
to cause serious physical injury to another person he causes
the death of such person or third person, and does
so under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance. The third option, again,
this would be the four criminal homicide offenses of murder
would be manslaughter in the second degree, a class C felony,

(06:43):
which is which carries a penalty of five to ten years,
and that would be A person is guilty of manslaughter's
second degree when he wantonly causes the death of another person,
including but not limited to the death resulting from the
operation of a motor vehicle. The last one would be
in this category reck homicide and that would be one
to five years Class D felony. Person is guilty of

(07:05):
reckless homicide when they recklessly cause the death of another person,
and recklessness is the key element involved in the crime.
Acting Someone acting reckless when the person fails to perceive
a substantial and unjustifiable risk that should have been a
parent I remember the cops. The cops no knock warrant,

(07:27):
knocked down the door. Brianna Taylor's boyfriend didn't break any laws.
He's they're in the wrong, They're in the wrong apartment.
He has a legal firearm. He thinks he's you know,
somebody's in there to kill him and his girlfriend. Boomy
pulled out his legal weapon and shot hit the cops.
Cops fire back. Brianna Taylor struck eight times. She is

(07:48):
sadly dead. It is it breaks it. Get's got to
break your heart. She defines what it means to be
a great American in every way, and and her life
is amazing. Actually, her own words are amazing. So now
the other charges now go to a different degree, and
that there are two wanton endangerment charges in Kentucky. One

(08:08):
wanton endangerment in the first degree one of five years
Class D felony. A person guilty of wanton endangerment in
the first degree under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the
value of human life, he wantedly engages in conduct which
creates a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury

(08:29):
to another person. The next category would be a wanton
endangerment in the second degree. Let's go to the reading
of the charges from earlier Today's Earlier this afternoon, the
above named defendant Brett Hankerson committed the offense of wanton
endangerment in the first degree when under circumstances manifesting extreme

(08:50):
indifference to human life, he wantonly shot a gun excuse me,
into the apartment occupied by initials C. Count two Wanton
endangerment in the first degree, on or about March thirteenth,
twenty twenty, in Jefferson County, Kentucky, the above named defendant,

(09:12):
Brett Hankerson, committed the offense of wanton endangerment in the
first degree when under circumstances manifesting extreme and difference to
human life, he wantonly shot a gun into the apartment
occupied by initials c N Count three Wanton endangerment in
the first degree, on or about March thirteenth, twenty twenty,

(09:35):
the Jefferson County. In Jefferson County, Kentucky, the above named defendant,
Brett Hankerson, committed the offense of wanton endangerment in the
first degree when under circumstances manifesting extreme and difference to
human life, he wantonly shot a gun into an apartment
occupied by initials z F against the peace and dignity

(09:56):
of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Mister foreperson. Is that the
decision of the grand jury? Thank you? So that is
the decision that was handed down today in this particular case.
Now we have been watching minute by minute now these
crowds growing in Louisville. It's getting scary many. I have

(10:20):
seen many people. I've seen people with baseball bats. I've
seen people with long rifles. The crowd is getting bigger
outcome the bullhorns. I've seen a lot of that, a
lot of restlessness. And there is a curfew that is
supposed to go into effect at nine pm Eastern tonight
in Louisville. And to the best of his ability, the

(10:43):
Attorney General, you know, laid out you know, everything before
the grand jury. That is our legal system. Is it perfect? No,
But I can't think of a better one. Our legal
system frustrates the living hell out of me. I believe
we have a dual justice system in so many ways.
I think one of the biggest successes of Donald Trump

(11:05):
has been to end disparit sentencing with criminal justice reform,
because there was disparit sentencing, you know, as it relates
to you know, all right, well, you have cocaine in
a powder, and cocaine and a rocket's still cocaine, and okay,
maybe one's more highly addicted. I don't. I just don't.
I'm not in the drug culture. I don't understand all
the I just know it's it's dangerous and it'll kill

(11:27):
you if you get in that world. And but there
was there was disparities that have now been rectified, and
President will never get the credit for that. The other
thing that we've got to understand here is that you know,
there are a lot of people have weighed in on
this case. I always maintained my I don't rush to judgment.

(11:51):
I don't. I believe in due process. I believe in
a presumption of innocence. I believe the facts have to
be presented. And if you can't get nine of twelve
in a grand jury where only one side of a
case is presented, the defense does not mount their case.

(12:13):
This is only the prosecution. What maybe people's expectations have
been in this case are blown out of proportion. We
saw that in Ferguson, we saw that in Baltimore. We've
seen that all the time. The politicians race out there,
you know, politicize something they don't know anything about it.
So it same with the media. Mob and what I've learned,

(12:33):
and I've told the story many times about the Richard
Jewel case, why we were right about that, And write
about Ferguson, and write about UVA, and write about Baltimore,
and write about Duke Lacrosse and write about all these
when everyone else is wrong because I don't rush the judgment.
The grand jury heard every detail of this. This is

(12:55):
what they nine of twelve at least decided. If you
couldn't get them now, they were presented with all the
other options. Now the question is do you have faith
in that system? Many do not. That's fair. You're allowed
to make up your own mind in America. But that's
the process, as was explained Leo Terrout. By the way,

(13:17):
I think of the perfect guest for it. He's a
civil rights attorney, sued cops a million times in his
career for abuse, and I'm dying to get his take
on And we have Ted Cruz today, Bill O'Reilly today
is blockbuster from Barismo, the latest on the Supreme Court.
And I'm in the swamp so I just noticed this
on Google that and it does gives It's called why

(13:37):
We're Police At Brianna Taylor's home, and there is an
investigative summary, and what it says is the following is
that Brianna's ex boyfriend, ex boyfriend now JaMarcus Glover Glover
was a known quote drug dealer and listed Brianna's address
as his home. And the warrants cited five pieces of

(13:58):
information establishing what the said, we're probable cause mister Glover's
car making repeated trips between the trap what they call
trap House and Miss Taylor's home, and her car's appearance
in front of this other I don't want to give
the address on other occasions, surveillance footage of him leaving
the apartment with a package in mid January, Postal Inspector's

(14:20):
confirmation mister Glover used her address to receive the parcels
and database searches indicating that as of late February, who
listed her apartment as her home? You know, it's it
just I just look at her life and look at
the postings and what I've seen. But anyway, so there

(14:42):
was misinformation shared on social media suggesting the officers showed
up at the house and the search warrant had been
signed by the Circuit court judge with her address. But
this Google dot Com piece said that Brianna Taylor or
was not the main target of the narcotics investigation, which

(15:03):
initially sent it around other individuals accused of selling drugs.
And then the reports author, which was a detective in
this case, who secured the warrant for this home and
four suspected drug houses. So it was about and it
was a no knock warrant, is what they call it.

(15:26):
I don't what does it say? Abolition now more people
with guns? I guess it's defund the police. All right,
quick break, welcome back, more breaking news straight ahead twenty
five now till the top of the hour. We're in
the swamp or in DC. Let me go back to
this USA today. Picked. I had not seen it originally,
and I you know, we were digging deep, digging deep.
I don't know why I buried it at the bottom

(15:48):
of my pile today anyway. So there what the headline is.
Why were police at Brianna Taylor's home? Here's what the
investigative summer recess? All right, so I missed this part
of it. I apologize. I want to get sure, make
sure I get the right and why, in other words,
why did the police have the search warrant for the address.
I got that part wrong. We always like to correct things,

(16:09):
and we do it in a very spectacular fashion, unlike
the mob in the media, because we always want to
get it right. Anyway, So police had the search warrant,
it was signed by a circuit court judge, and it
was the right address. Let me just clarify that point.
I stand corrected. Now. The eight page report reinforced the

(16:31):
Taylor was not She was not the target of the
narcotics investigation, which initially sent it around other individuals accused
of selling drugs. The reports author, a detective in this case,
secured the March twelveth or warrant for Taylor's home and
four suspected drug houses. We know what it's like in

(16:53):
drug houses, Okay. So then it showed that the police
in Louisville, the New Place based investigation squad, spent about
two and a half months conducting heavy surveillance. Now with surveillance,
I'm sure it comes with that, videos and pictures, etc. Etc.
Then Taylor was linked to the suspects and that investigation,
according to the report, because a car registered in her

(17:15):
name stopped in early January. One of the properties being watched. Moreover,
it stated that JaMarcus Glover, a convicted drug dealer and
a former boyfriend, had picked up a package at her
home January sixteenth while police were watching him. And it
was Mattingly, the officer who shot at Taylor's apartment who

(17:37):
asked to Postal service whether Glover was receiving packages at
Taylor's apartment, and they wrote in that sworn half a
davit for a search warrant that he had verified through
the postal worker that Glover was receiving packages at Taylor's
home through a postal inspector from Louisville, and then the
postal inspector later told a news station that isn't true.

(18:01):
And then Glover listed Taylor's home on his address on
a Chase Bank account, and a search form for the
account was executed. On March nineteenth, six days after the death,
Glover listed Taylor's phone number as his when he filed
a complaint against the police officer for a parking violation.
It just gets it gets complicated. Um, you know, I'm

(18:23):
just giving you this, all of this, and that was
the piece I was missing, and I apologize, but everything else,
you know, this was this was now all put together,
this is now how he ended up. Now, this was
all presented before the grand jury. Every charge option was

(18:44):
presented before the grand jury. And that is what they said.
By the way, let's go apparently the president speaking about
the Supreme Court. Let's dip in and listen. Oh, he
can do it very easily. He can very quickly. From
what I heard, he doesn't even have to hold a hearing.
He wouldn't have to hold a hearing. He's going to,
I would think, but he wouldn't even actually have to

(19:06):
hold one. And you know, most of these people are young,
and they just went through the process. You know, many
of them just went through the process recently, so it's
not like, gee, let's look at papers at a fifteen
years old. No. I think the process is going to
go very quickly. The hearing, I think Lindsay's going to
call the data. The hearing is soon. You can't call
it until you have the candidate. And once we have

(19:29):
the nominee, I will, you know, I will wait to
hear what the date is. But from that point I
wouldn't think would be fairly quick. They're all extraordinary people.
I can't imagine it could be anything else and the Republicans.
I mean, you saw him as well as the Republicans.
Most of them have already made their intentions very clear,

(19:51):
even Josh. So, I think that that's a tough vote. Right, So,
I think I think we're in great check. But let
me ask you that question, j Jones, asking a question
about timing at all. You know we have nothing but time.
If John, I think, I think absolutely we can't get
it done. We could do it even with a full
complement of hearings. I think that you know, the President's alluded.

(20:12):
Justice Stevens was confirmed in nineteen days. Jessice Skinsburg was
confirmed in about forty days. We've got the time to
do it, We've got the wherewithal to do it. And
I think we should have a vote for the election
for the reasons the President articulates. And I think we
can get it done and we will. Mister President, do
you believe that justice was served in the Opera Taylor
case in Kentucky? And what is your message to the

(20:35):
black community who believed that perhaps justice was not served
behind a decision I was rendered by the grand jury
in Kentucky. Well, my message is that I love the
black community and I've done more for the black community
than any other president. And I say with a possible
exception of Abraham Lincoln. And I mean that with opportunity zones,
and with criminal justice reform, with prison reform, with what

(20:59):
we've done for historically black universities, colleges, schools, what we've done,
it's nobody's done more. Abraham Lincoln, let's give him the nod.
But beyond that, nobody's done more. I love the Black community.
I don't know enough about it. I heard a decision
was just made. We've been together here and so we

(21:20):
haven't discussed it. But after I see what the decision is,
I will have a commentary. Okay, thank you all very much.
Pretty true to the headline that we mentioned about President
speaking about the Supreme Court, Democrats now looks like Biden
isn't the only top Democrat who may not be able
to handle the job. Apparently, Democrats are fearing that Senator

(21:44):
Diane Feinstein, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is
not up to the task of leading the party's efforts
to stop Senate Republicans from confirming President Trump's Supreme Court choice. Well,
this has happened twenty nine times I have many times
have to repeat this. Twenty nine times in election years
there have been vacancies on the Supreme Court. All twenty

(22:06):
nine times presidents have nominated replacements for the Supreme Court. Now,
we got lectured often by Obama and Biden that elections
have consequences. They can come, but they got to hang
out in the back. I remember once famously Barack Obama said, okay,
well we won. In other words, you lost. Well, Democrats,

(22:27):
they lost the presidency and they lost the Senate. Now,
seventeen nineteen times when it was the same party in
the White House, same party in the majority in the Senate,
seventeen and nineteen of those justices were confirmed in presidential
election years and years in which the party in the
White House was different than the majority party in the Senate,

(22:48):
only one in ten justices were confirmed, hence Garland in
twenty sixteen, Marrick Garland. And in that case they just
saidn't know, we're not doing it. You know, our job
as advice and consent. No, we don't approve of your decision.
And that was consistent with precedent. I want to talk

(23:09):
about who changed precedent. That would be the Democrats. They
are the ones that started filibustering circuit court judges, not Republicans.
I want to know who got rid of the the
you know, need our simple majority for the Supreme Court.
That would be Harry Reid in twenty thirteen with Obama's blessing.
Not the Republicans. Now they're threatening, as I told you,

(23:32):
what are they threatening? Stacked the courts? Joe Biden won't
answer that question. Joe Biden won't give us the list
of names he promised to give the people he might
appointed the Supreme Court. Joe Biden, he doesn't answer questions.
I guess why should he start now? With forty one
days to go, Let's see if he gets away with
that in the debates that'll begin September twenty ninth, one

(23:53):
week from well, actually it's Tuesday. It'll be this Tuesday,
the first debate coming up. That's in just what six days?
Can't wait? It'll be interesting anyway. So we have that
going on now. Lisa Murkowski, who you know, obviously because

(24:15):
of Mitt Romney, and I give me Romney credit. I've
been very disappointed with Mitt Romney. I'm not held back
my disappointment. I do not regret supporting him in twenty twelve.
I thought they had a wonderful family. He would have
been a much better president, I think than Barack Obama.
I think he could have won that election had that
campaign been run better. I think they took their foot
off the gas at just the wrong time. And I

(24:35):
don't know why. It's inexplicable to me anyway that one's ready. Yeah,
that's a long story here anyway. So Lisa Murkowski says,
I'm not ruling out voting for Trump Supreme Court pick.
I don't even know who it is yet. I know
everybody wants to ask the question, will you confirm the nominee?
She said outside the Capitol. We don't have a nominee yet.

(24:56):
You and I don't know who that is, and so
I can't confirm whether or not I can confirm a
nominee when I don't know the nominee is. But they
already seem to have the boats as it as it is.
Chuck Schumer, he got heckoed yesterday as we played pretty interesting.
You know, it's the look, it's the same thing um
that we always see and hear. Democrats are just their

(25:19):
hypocrisy is breathtaking. Republicans, you know the Republicans threatened to
get rid of the legislative filibuster. Do they threaten to
stack the courts? That they threatened to get rid of
the electoral college? Do they threatened to impeach the president?
Every single day that they threatened to impeach the attorney general?
This is all happened. This is your modern radical, extreme

(25:42):
democratic socialist party, the most extreme presidential nominee vice presidential
nominees in the in the history of any major party
in America. Um, you know that that's who they are.
That the finds them anyway, So that's that news. Now

(26:04):
we have other big breaking news today and as it
relates to Ron Johnson, Senator Ron Johnson and Senator Charles
Grassley releasing a report what has been a long investigation
into Hunter Biden's role on the board of Ukrainian natural
gas firm Barisma Holdings. You're not getting the billion taxpayer

(26:25):
dollars unless the unless you fire a Ukrainian prosecutor. Why
would a vice president want to fire rain Cranian prosecutor?
Everythink about that, dumb um, you know. But anyway, hang on,
I gotta tell somebody I'm on air. Well, why do

(26:45):
people call me my best friends call me when I'm
on the air, like it's an emergency. Anyway, So, uh,
Barisma Holdings and what they allege is extensive and a
complex financial transaction. They found that they faced obstacles from
the obstructionist Democratic Party. The chairman added that there still

(27:05):
is a lot more work there involved in It's an
eighty seven page report. The report point it's out that
the Obama administration officials they all knew Hunter Biden's position
on the board of BISMA was problematic. It interfered with
the efficient execution of policy with respect to Ukraine, and
they were monitoring me in the Ukrainian Embassy. I was

(27:27):
number one on the list of twelve people being monitored. Yeah,
welcome to my world anyway. The investigation shows the extent
in which Obama administration officials ignored all of the warning
signs when Vice President Biden's son Hunter zero experienced Hunter
no experienced oil, gas, energy or Ukraine with respect to

(27:51):
executing the policy of Ukraine with the Obama administration. Biden
was running the US UK relations and policy for the
Obama administration, and even though Hunter Biden's position cast a
shadow in terms of advancing anti corruption reforms in Ukraine.
The committee said there were only two individuals they raised

(28:11):
concerns and they were shot down. One of them was
that guy George Kent, one of the hearsay witnesses in
the impeachments. Get sham At testified in that trial. Anyway,
The reports stated that hunter Biden forms significant, consistent financial
relationships with the founder of Barisma, and that his and
his business partners also made millions of millions of dollars

(28:35):
from that association while his father was vice president. Yeah.
Probably because why did you get the millions? Any experience? NU?
Why did you get it? UNU? Maybe because your father's
vice Probably. Then it goes on to describe even further,
revealing that they obtained financial records US Treasury Department showing

(28:57):
potential criminal activity relating to transactions among Hunter Biden as
families associates with Ukrainian, Russian, Kazakhstan and Chinese nationals. The
committee stated they received records that Hunter Biden sent thousands
of dollars to individuals quote who've either been involved in

(29:19):
transactions consistent with possible human trafficking and association with the
adult entertainment industry, or potential association with prostitution. It's in
the report. Some recipients of those funds are Ukrainian or
Russian citizens. The report states, oh, I think that would
compromise our vice president at the time, now, wouldn't it?

(29:41):
And the records note that it's a documented fact that
hunter Biden has sent funds to nonresident alien women in
the US that are citizens of Russia and Ukraine. And then,
by the way, those funds well that we have received
that funds were received from hunter by to individuals located

(30:01):
in Russia in Ukraine. Whoop seed easy, there's that Russia
word again, and it gets worse from there. Deserved a
fully staffed Supreme Court of nine. The President nominates, and
then the Senate advises and consents or not, but they
go forward with the process. The American people expect Joe Hugarland,
the President's nominee, to be given a fair hearing and

(30:24):
a timely vote in the Senate. The Senate should do
their job. Every day that goes by without a ninth
justice is another day the Americans people's business is not
getting done. When the Constitution is one hundred clear, the
President of the United States has the right to nominate
someone to be a justice of the Supreme Court. Senate's

(30:47):
function is to hold hearings and to vote. I think
whatever a religion is, it has its own dogma. The
law is totally different. And I think in your case, Professor,
when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is

(31:11):
that the dogma lives loudly within you. And that's of concern.
And if it's simple man, that means it's all things.

(31:33):
Bill O'Reilly dot com. We're following many stories today, as
we've been telling you throughout most of the day. We
have one of the officers in the Brianna Taylor shooting
charge with well multiple cases of want and disregard and
indifference towards human life. We'll get back to that. Also,
Leo Torrello's coming up on that I told you about

(31:55):
what's happening with the Hunter Biden report. This is a
devastating beat down by Senators Ron Johnson and Charles Grassley.
We are now just forty one days and you are
the ultimate jury. And Bill O'Reilly I think probably rightly
saying I noticed that you wrote I think it was
on your website, which I don't have a free membership

(32:16):
towards so I wouldn't be able to see it myself,
but apparently Linda pays for it. The next six weeks
will be nasty, mister, O'Reilly, how are your own? By
the way, congratulations on the new book, another number one
bestseller in his killing series, Killing Crazy Horse. And by
the way, Amazon dot com, Hannity dot com, bookstores everywhere.

(32:36):
Congratulations sir on that part. And thanks for being back,
all right, and you were a large part of Killing
Crazy Horse of success, and you know I'm a grateful
kind of guy. Congratulations on the book bill, O'Reilly, all right,
lots of stuff going on. Number one. You know, I
hate this trying very very sad, tragic cases on television.

(32:59):
And that's a Brianna Taylors, who I just caution everybody.
You weren't in the grand jury. You didn't hear what
they had presented to them. Please, And I know this
is going to fall on deaf ears. I know that
people are gonna come on and I and they're gonna
rip it up and they're gonna say the cops should
get this or this one, you get that. I just

(33:19):
think it's horrible. It's the worst part of television news.
I believe in our system. I think that the system,
particularly these days, under a microscope. Everybody's watching everything. I'm
not going to say the guy who was guilty the
police office or not guilty. I'm going to wait for
the evidence to be presented to the jury. That is

(33:40):
our system. Don't undermine our system as far as by
the way it just and Bill, I just got to
add this to a dollar. I mean, it is a
series of a horrific tragedy. Brianna Taylor's boyfriend thinks that,
oh my gosh, with somebody just broke in our apartment
and he has a legal gun and he's defending. He

(34:00):
thinks he's defending against intruders, and then a gun battle
breaks out. It is heartbreaking. This woman is the epitome
of everything great about an American citizen. I mean literally
dedicated or life to saving other people's lives. It is
heart wrenching. A series of tragic, tragic, horrific errors here.

(34:26):
You know that really needs to be explained to absolutely
and a fair minded Americans understand that tragedies happen every day,
But when they do happen, if they are preventable, as
this is, look you got to know knock warrant. You
got to know one hundred percent who's in that house

(34:47):
or that building or wherever you're going. You can't well
said no, all right, and this is for the police.
You have to know because you're bursting in. We have
a second Amendment. You were allowed to fend yourself if
people come into your home and you don't know who
they are. So you have to know. And they didn't
know in Louisville, and that was the genesis of the

(35:09):
whole thing. You want to talk a little politics. Forty
one days, mister O'Reilly, two new polls out. I was
kind of shocked. It was by ABC, Washington Post. Donald
Trump is leading in Florida by a pretty healthy margin
and Arizona. And I still to this day do not
believe Donald Trump can be pulled accurately by the mob.

(35:30):
That poll doesn't mean anything, even though it's favorable to
the president, because none of the poles mean anything today,
a week from today, and I'm so happy I'm going
to be talking to you after the debate next Wednesday.
I'm so happy I'm going to be doing that. A
week from today, the polls will start to matter because
Americans are going to get a look. They're gonna get

(35:52):
a look at the two guys, all right, and they'll
be under pressure, both of them, because Wallace is no
cupcake guy. I love that phrase. All Right, He's going
to ask him tough questions because he's got a legacy
to live up to, which is his father, who is
the best broadcast journalism in the history of this country.
So anyway, we're going to get a good look, ninety

(36:13):
minute look at both of them, and in that context,
people will solidify their vote. So this to me, the
debate next Tuesday is the most important day of the
presidential campaign, and it will get the biggest audience I
predict of any presidential debate in history. I agree with you.

(36:36):
I think the expectations for Biden are extraordinarily low. However,
I do think Chris is going to ask both sides questions.
One of the two has never really been asked a
lot of tough questions. But yeah, but neither of them
are going to answer the question. This is why the

(36:58):
debate system is counterproductive to any kind of clarity. So,
all right, you and I have both done this kind
of stuff for our whole careers. We've interviewed people. We've
had two people on it once. We try to balance
out the questioning. But here Wallace asked Trump the first

(37:20):
question because he's a president, all right, And Trump gets
two minutes to reply uninterrupted. So Wallace can't do what
I do, be obnoxious and say, you pinhead, you're not listen,
you're not answering your question. Can't do that. Can't do
what I did to Barney Frank. He can't jump it.
So Trump, yeah, I mean he might answer it, but
maybe he won't answer it, or maybe he'll answer it

(37:42):
for ten seconds and the next one hundred and ten
seconds he'll say what he wants. You can count on
Biden doing that. So Biden gets a tough question he
can't process, and he's not going to answer it. He's
just going to start to babble, and that's what you're
going to see. But then after they're finished babbling, both

(38:04):
of them, Wallace then has a little room and that's
where we'll see if Wallace is perceptive enough to go
in and say, hey, you didn't answer the question. This
is the point that the American people need to know.
You want another shot at it, You got to be
almost that obnoxious to get these guys to really play

(38:24):
into what you're doing, because both of them have an agenda.
They'll both be rehearsed, they'll both have things they want
to say. But you know what my advice to both
candidates is, don't even worry about Chris Wallace. You're you're
gonna go after your opponent. And Trump is a genius
at that. We all remember what he did to Little Marco,

(38:46):
what he did the lion ted, what he did the
Jeb Bush. Boring Jeff, you know he can bring it
low energy, Jeb. Keep here to keep your adjective straight.
Mister yeah, I'm sorry. But by the way he did it,
he did it very effectively. He threw them off. He
threw them all off their game, particularly mister Bush, Governor Bush.

(39:08):
He threw them off. Now, if he can do that
to Biden, if Trump can do it to Biden, because
Wallace won't also ask him a standard question, all right,
and then you'll see what kind of mental acuity Biden has.
You're gonna have to be quick. You're gonna be fast
on your feed if President Trump decides to go after
you and ask you questions, which I would do if

(39:31):
I were President of Trump. I would say, Okay, Chris,
he's answer your question. But I got a question for
the former Vice president Boom. Because Wallace can't stop you.
He can't stop you. You can do it. And that
See here's my take on how Joe Biden is being
prepared for this debate. He's gonna have every topic, He's
gonna have three talking points that if he memorizes the

(39:53):
three points of regurgitate them again and again and again.
And I think, you know, I think you're right, I think,
and I think it's a very hard job for Chris
or anybody else moderating a debate. I thought he did
the best job the last time. That was my opinion
in terms of being balanced in this. But I you know,

(40:14):
but we really they're designed to be joined press conferences,
but they can't control it completely. There's going to be
some give and take. And I think this is where
now we're going to see pressure points brought to bear
on Biden that we'd never seen before. And I'm not
predicting me whether he's going to do good or bad.
He survived Kamala Harris destroying him in that debate just

(40:34):
destroyed him. And the key to who It is this.
If Joe Biden has clarity that day, then he's not
going to hurt himself very badly because the people hate
Trump are gonna hate Trump no matter what Trump does.
We're talking about the very maybe five to eight percent

(40:56):
of persuadables who are going to make the difference in
this election. These are the people that are going to
be watching. But if Joe Biden is a bad day,
if he's off his game, all right, it's over. Trump wins.
Did you see I'm sure he did the town hall
and CNN, Uh, we're Biden and Anderson Cooper. You so
that right that you want to talk about cupcake interviews.

(41:17):
That was a cupcake interview. But here here I tweeted,
and I've got, you know, almost four million Twitter followers.
That's amazing. I think it's because of a dog. But
I tweeted, I said, Biden knows the subject matter. Bill,
it's not. I'm not it is because of the dog. Bell.
Let's be honest. I'm only teasing. All right, hold that thought.

(41:37):
I'm not trying to interrupt you here. I just I
want to get to the spot we gotta do. We're
in the mother, We're in the swamp. Today, we're in
the sewer, We're in Washington, d C. We have Leo
Terrell on the Breanna Taylor case. More updates on the
Supreme Court. We have our investigation wow, Ron Johnson and
Charles Grassley, these developments Hunter Biden, Barisma, Devin stating, and

(42:00):
this will be a part of this campaign right as
we continue. Bill O'Reilly is with us all things simple man,
Bill o'reiley dot com now a number one bestseller again
killing Crazy Horse's latest book in his killing series. You
know one day it's going to be killing Hannity. It
can't wait for that version. But anyway, all right, let's
go back to the debate and the prep that you

(42:23):
would offer them. Now, that is is what it makes
this point about Biden and CNN where we left it.
When the break started, I tweeted out, Biden knows the
subject matter, he knows in advance. And about a minute
after that tweet went out, I got hammered by the

(42:43):
organized far left cadre and I said, aha, they know,
they know. So what CNN did was made a deal
with the Biden campaign says we can't tell you the
questions like Hillary Clinton got the court last last four
years ago to see any who can't do that? But
here the areas because I had to vet the people,

(43:05):
and you know you can't not vet people on live TV.
What if somebody has torret syndrome. So anyway, and the
reason I knew that was because Biden gave this answer
and I'm sure you remember it about chicken manure creating jobs.
Do you remember that? And I went, who would ever
in a million years bring that in unless they knew

(43:26):
that question or that line of question? Who was coming?
All right? Prep all right, if you're if you're on
a Trump side, you want him to make four positive
points and four negative points because you got ninety minutes.
All right, So the four positive points are what he's
done in the economy, what he's done to isis what

(43:48):
he's done in general for the country before COVID. You
want to stay away from COVID, all right, You're going
to have to mention it because that's where Biden's going.
Biden's going to the COVID your fault, you killed all
the people or heraem say it, all right, but you
don't want to make that the centerpiece. You want to
make the centerpiece that we had a vibrant, robust economy.
We're going to have it again. The vaccine will be

(44:09):
out soon. As soon as it's out, Bang, we go
into motion, and if you vote for Democrats, they're not
going to take you there at all. In fact, we'll
go into a recession. That's Trump Biden basically has to
come across as a guy who's going to calm the
waters in the country. So if I'm advising Biden, I said,
you're the calm presence, all right, So you don't get

(44:32):
too nasty, don't get dismissive. Because Donald Trump has a
large following, whether the far left wants to admit it
or not, many millions of Americans like him. Don't dismiss him.
You come across says I'm going to calm everything down, COVID,

(44:53):
the economy, race relations. I'm the guy that can do that.
And that's how I advise both of them. All right,
Billo Riley, thanks so much for being will us. We'll
have you on one day after the debate next week.
Bill O'Reilly dot com. Killing Crazyhorse now the latest number
one book in his Killing series. It's on Amazon dot com,

(45:14):
bookstores everywhere. Hannity dot Com. Thanks bill for being Will
us appreciate it? Now? A lot of news we've got
to get to. We're gonna update you on the Brianna taylorcase.
We're gonna update you on the Beisma investigation. We're gonna
update you on the Supreme Court. As we continue from
the swamp, he draws his inspiration from US soldiers and
the brave men and women who wear the blue, the

(45:36):
warriors who never run from a fight. They run to it.
And in this fight to save the soul of our country,
it's time to wake the silent majority. Let this moment
radicalize you. The battle lines are drawn, the mission is clear,
and the time is upon us. With your help, for

(45:57):
November third, Republicans are going to win the House, win
the Senate, and again win the White House. When the
brave are prepared, there's no battle we can't win. Let's
do this suit up, chin down, and he'll take the lead.

(46:19):
This is the Sean Hannity Show. Senator Cruz, good morning,

(47:17):
those were your words four years ago. You don't believe
that anymore. Well, good morning, it's good to be with you.
Thank you for having me. You know, it's interesting if
you look at the debate four years ago, every single
political player has switched positions. I looked at your clip
of politicians from twenty sixteen. You know you didn't play
Joe Biden, you didn't play Hillary Clinton, you didn't play

(47:38):
Nancy Pelosi, you didn't play Chuck Schumer. Why because every
one of them is saying exactly the opposite of what
they're saying. Now. Everyone has switched positions, and so the whole,
the whole promo you're pushing about hypocrisy. If you want
to say it, you could say everybody involved in this
as a hypocrite thinking about the Supreme Court because we've
lost that battle. I don't want to talk about the

(47:58):
Republicans anymore. Fear of this will destroy the Senate. This
will enjoy the Senate. I would say. It's sort of
like people saying, hey, climate change is coming. No, it's
not coming. It's here the Senate. It has been destroyed
as we know it. We caught the hearing not take
meetings with the nominee. So we want to see the Senate.
Democrats write this nominee tooth and nail. No matter what happens,
everybody's thinks we're gonna have to blow up the entire system.

(48:19):
You're gonna have to get rid of the electoral college
because the people, I don't see it. Because the minority
in this country decides who the judges are, and they
decide who the president is is. They need a constitutional
amendment to do that. And if Democrats, if Joe Biden wins,
Democrats can sack the courts and they can do that
amendment and they can get it past. All right, twenty
four now till the top of the hour, eight hundred
and nine four one, Shaun is a toll free telephone number.

(48:42):
You know, there's a big difference and a big distinction here.
Now there is a precedent where twenty nine times, and
this cannot you know, be negated here in this debate.
Twenty nine times during presidential election years we have had
presidents of the United States. All twenty nine times it

(49:03):
happened make appointments in an election year to the US
Supreme Court if there is a vacancy, all right, now,
when the party of the president is also the majority
party in the Senate, seventeen of the nineteen times that
that scenario played out, that the nominee was confirmed. Now,

(49:26):
in ten cases you had a president one party, and
you had a Senate majority of the other party. In
that case, only one of the ten nominees was confirmed,
which actually would point out what happened in twenty sixteen.
I'm not sure you're comparing apples to apples oranges to oranges,

(49:48):
because precedent matters. Why didn't they have a vote on
Merrick Garland because they didn't want Merrick Garland to be
on the court. You know, Mitt Romney, of all people,
I can't believe I'm quoting them, because I've been pretty
disappointed him. At Romney I supported wholeheartedly. We met Romney
in twenty twelve. I thought he'd be a much better
president the Barack Obama. I stand by my endorsement of

(50:10):
him today. And you know, and it's just interesting to
watch his evolution because he seems to be except for now.
Maybe maybe now, I don't know, maybe he understands. Maybe
he's held on to this principle that conservatives like constitutionalists
and originalists on the court, in other words, those that

(50:31):
don't legislate from the bench, those that don't negate coequal
branches of government, those that believe that you're supposed to
have checks and balances because liberals what they could never
get done legislatively, but they could never get done at
the ballot box. They've always hoped that they'd stacked the
courts with activist justices that would assert the power of

(50:55):
the legislative branch and the executive branch and rule from
the bench through secutive fiat. And that has always been
their hope. Now more and more it looks like it's
going to be Amy Coney Barrett, who is an unbelievably
well qualified candidate for the US Supreme Court. Is Chuck
Schumer ever gonna like it? No? But now the fact

(51:17):
that we're now getting to let's see, we're gonna threaten
to stack the courts And Joe Biden won't answer that question. Well,
I'm gonna imagine between now and Tuesday, when he debates
President Trump, he's gonna have to answer that question. He
said he was going to give us a list of names.
He said he was leaning towards African American women that

(51:39):
he would appoint to the US Supreme Court. I think
he should be transparent, But again, Joe never answers questions.
Joe's day is usually done at nine or ten am,
and then he's resting Weston, we waxation the rest of
the day, takes it easy. I'm sure he's doing debate
prep all day long, all right, Joe, No, no, no no,
there's only three things. Got to memorize on every topic.

(52:01):
If you do that, you'll be good. And I'm sure
he's gonna memorize his line as well. And you know,
now the question is is can he take those three
points four points maybe if he's lucky, and memorize it
and stick it in his brain and you know, regurgitate
them back and you know, maintain that regurgitation for two
whole minutes at a time. Then hopefully, you know, he

(52:23):
might have Oh he was great, he was presidential. Oh
he survived. That's what the left was really hoping for,
that he survives. And that's what's at stake here. But
there's a lot of other issues at stake. By the way,
Ted Cruz is going to join us in a minute. Also,
we have Leo Terrell is going to weigh in on

(52:43):
the happenings in Louisville, and there's been protesting going on
all day since they announced only one of the police
officers three officers in the case, Brett Hankinson, is his
name was charged with well three separate counts. One wanton
endangerment in the first degree, which is under circumstances manifesting

(53:07):
extrement indifference to human life. He was the officer that's
fired ten shots, and they claiming that he wanted lye
shot the gun in the apartment occupied that where Brionna
Taylor lost her life that night. Count two wanting endangerment
in the first degree and maybe's basically the same count

(53:28):
but different person. Count three wanted endangerment in the first degree,
and that the above name defendant, Brett Hankinson, committed a
wanton endangerment in the first degree. Now, there were other
charges they could have made. They didn't make any charges
for the other officers. What do we learn now? The
gun that Brianna Taylor's boyfriend had was legal, and so

(53:50):
he thought somebody was there to cause them harm, which
would not be an unreasonable conclusion. But more facts need
to come out in the case. And anyway, Brianna Taylor's
boyfriend did fire first, that's not in dispute, and a
shootout begins, you know, happens right there in the apartment.
She had just woken up from a sound sleep. This

(54:11):
is a you know, an incredible person with you know,
she's out there working two jobs and as an EMT
healthcare provider, it's her dream. She loves serving other people.
So sad and you know, I understand some people might
disagree with the verdict, but okay, you knock down the
door and shots of being fired in your directions, Who

(54:32):
do you blame there? It is a series of tragedy
to me, tragic errors, inexplicable on so many levels. But
that's where we are. Now we have the Supreme Court
battle going on. Lisa Murkowski said that she can't rule
out voting for the president's Supreme Court pick, and she

(54:55):
said she wouldn't rule that out. I know everybody wants
to ask the question, will you confirm the nominee? She
said outside the Capitol as the Republican colleagues were gathering
for their weekly policy lunch. We don't have a nominee yet.
You and I don't know who that is, and so
I can't confirm whether or not I can confirm a
nominee when I don't know who the nominee is. Sounds

(55:15):
like the door is opening a little bit, and maybe
Lisa Murkowski's hearing from the people of Alaska that they
want constitutionalists on the US Supreme Court. It was fun
watching Chucky Schumer yesterday get heckled during his Supreme Court comments.
That was pretty interesting. And it's amazing to listen to Democrats.

(55:36):
What are they threatening to do now? They're threatening to
stack the court. They're threatening to move forward with eliminating
the electoral College, by the way, very difficult task, but
they're saying they might want to do that. Nancy Pelosi
is out there with the arrows in her quiver that
she keeps talking about, one of them being she can
impeach the president for any reason, any day every day.

(55:57):
I'm like, okay, I guess that shows us where where
they're headed in terms of their radicalism. Can we give
her a new nickname? What Nancy can want to call it?
Good morning, Nancy, good morning, good morning, Nancy, good morning boy,
good Sunday morning, Oh, good Sunday morning. Right in the
middle of a sentence, it was weird. That was that
was so bid a mental hiccup. That literally was like

(56:20):
you put your brows. She didn't have an answer of
what you could do, because the answer is she can
do nothing. She just stole his face. It kind of
reminds me of when you told him about Bill Airs.
It just went blank. You know, he was like, sorry,
what's happening? Oh well I'll ask that question. Thank you, Sean.
He did ask it, Oh he did, to his credit.
It was credit being the only one. It was very

(56:40):
just some guy in the neighborhood, George friends, some guys
living just happen to start my political career fight in
the middle of his house. Can he blows stuff up
at Bernadine every once in a while, at big deal.
You know, it's all good anyway. So all of this
and what else are they threatening? You're threatening to end
the legislative Philipbush. There they are threatening. Oh, let's use

(57:02):
the words to burn it down. Don Lemon. No, No,
he didn't mean it. It was taken out of contact. Yeah, okay,
it wasn't taken out of context. He's full of crap.
I was taken out of contact fast. I think he
probably got a phone call from the boss. You might
want to back off that little bit of all right,
these are tough, fascinating times, historic forty one days. You're

(57:24):
the ultimate jury. You're the ultimate jury in spite of
all the noise. And by the way, if you're gonna win,
win by a big margin, because I don't really trust
the same Democrats that used Russian disinformation and were involved
and premeditated fraud on a FISA court. If you weren't
involved in it, you'd never said a word about it,

(57:44):
which means that they're perfectly fine with the with the tactic.
Senator Cruised, good morning, those were your words four years ago.
You don't believe that anymore. Well, good morning, it's it's
good to be with you. Thank you for having me.
You know, it's interesting if you look at the debate
four years ago, every single political player has switched positions.
I looked at your clip of politicians from twenty sixteen.

(58:07):
You know he didn't play Joe Biden. You didn't play
Hillary Clinton, you didn't play Nancy Pelosi, you didn't play
Chuck Schumer. Why because every one of them is saying
exactly the opposite of what they're saying. Now. Everyone has
switched positions, and so the whole promo you're pushing about hypocrisy,
If you want to say it, you could say everybody
involved in this is a hypocrite, all right, Senator to
crude I thought we had you earlier. We just did

(58:29):
the whole segment we had put aside for you. But
let's get your take on the Supreme Court in the
two minutes we have. Will rebook it for another day. Senate.
Always great to have you. Well, it's great to be
with you. This is the most important decision that has
been before the Senate in years, and it is the
future of the Constitution, the future of the Bill of Rights.

(58:50):
This is why the American people elected Donald Trump to
nominate a strong constitutionalist, and this is why the American
people elected Republican majorities in the Senate to confirms on constitutionalist.
I believe we need to get the job done before
election day, and I think we will. I think we
will have the votes, I believe. What are your thoughts
on Amy Coney Barrett, who seems to be the front

(59:11):
runner at this time. Well, I think Judge Barrett has
a strong record as an academic. You're right that she
seems to be the front runner at this point. What
I have urged the President is to nominate an individual
who has a proven record of standing up as a
constitutionalist and enduring the slings and arrows and criticisms that

(59:37):
come as a consequences. That's been the pattern that has
proven the most effective previously. As you know, I've got
a book coming out next week next Tuesday called One
Vote Away, How a single Supreme Court Seat can Change History.
And there's an entire chapter in that book that discusses
how how Republican presidents can get these decisions right. And

(01:00:01):
the most important criterion to look for is a proven
record in the face of withering criticism. All right, Senator,
we'll have you on next Tuesday about that book. Also
a little debate you know, take, and we'll be watching
very closely. Twenty nine times this has happened all twenty
nine times presidents made nominations. Thank you, Senator Ted Cruz

(01:00:23):
for being ones. We'll talk to you next week. Senator,
Live free or die, America, the world on the brink.
You are the ultimate jury. Forty one days Leo Terreau
away in on the Brianna Taylor decision from earlier today.
One of the three cops indicted three felony D counts.
We'll get back into in a second. We've been breaking

(01:00:44):
the news today and this is huge, and that is
the Senate Homeland Security Committee, the Finance committees. They have
now released an interim report that is devastating to Hunter Biden,
Joe Biden and the Obama administration about extensive and complex
financial transactions. They talked about in this report, the difficulty

(01:01:10):
and obstacles they faced from Democrats not wanting them to
get to the truth, and that they have a lot
more work to come. But what they have discovered in
this eighty seven page report, Obama administration officials knew about
Hunter Biden's position on the board of Barisma was problematic
and it interfered in their in Joe's execution of policy

(01:01:35):
in respect to Ukraine. The investigation showed the extent to
which officials and the Obama administrations ignored all of the
warning signs when the Vice President's son joined the board
of this corrupt Ukrainian oligarch's company. Hunter Biden joined Barisma
at the very same time of the consulting firm Blue

(01:01:55):
Star Strategies. He admitted on Good Morning America he had
no background and oil and gas, or energy or even
Ukraine millions of dollars were talking about. And this is
when Vice President Joe Biden was running US Ukraine relations
for the Obama administration. We also know that even though
Hunter Biden's position on the boardcast to shadow over all

(01:02:18):
these things, the committees, you know, there're only two people
were brave enough to raise their concerns with superiors, and
they were ignored. One of them, by the way, was
George Kent. You may remember from the impeachment sham of
the Democrats. It went into significant consistent financial relationships as

(01:02:38):
it relates to Hunter Biden and Barisma and its founders,
and also millions of dollars made an association from that
association with the father in charge of the money for
the country, our country with them. And then you remember
this this brag of Joe Biden's. I said, you got
six hours, son of them be They did it. They

(01:02:59):
fired the Muslim said I'm not going to We're not
going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you
have no authority, you're not the president, the president said,
I said, calling him, I said, I'm telling you're not
getting the billion dollars. I said, you're not getting a billion.
I'm gonna be leaving here. And I think it was
about six hours. I look, I said, leaving six hours.
If the prosecutors not fired, you're not getting the money.

(01:03:21):
Son of them got fired. Son of them be why
would a vice president in charge of Ukraine want a
prosecutor in Ukraine fired while he was investigating his zero
experienced son being paid millions. They also found financial transactions
with Hunter Biden, his family and associates with Ukraine, Russian,

(01:03:44):
Chinese nationals. Thousands of dollars sent to individuals either involved
in transactions consistent with possible human trafficking and association with
the adult entertainment industry or potential association even with prostitution.
Some recipients of these funds they were Ukrainian or Russian citizens,

(01:04:05):
and they actually were sending funds to nonresident alien women
in the US who are citizens from Russia and Ukraine,
and they subsequently sent the money back to their countries.
And it gets worse from there now. Peter Schweitzer broke
this book and his best selling book, By the Way,
a new film is now promoting regarding all this, writing

(01:04:28):
The Dragon, exposing the Biden family ties to China. All
He exposed all of this in his book that he released.
I guess it was about a year or two ago.
John Solomon, editor in chief of Just the News dot Com,
He's been all over this now for a couple of years.
And Greg Jarrett Fox News legal analysts, Peter, you broke
the story first that I saw, and it went further

(01:04:49):
from there. Let's talk about what you read today. Yeah,
I think the report is amazing. It not only built
on the reporting that idea that John has done and
some of the analysis that Greg has provided, but there's
a lot of new information here. I mean the news
media is trying to spin it as there's nothing new here.

(01:05:12):
You have just, for example, just one nugget three and
a half million dollars sent to Hunter Biden's firm by
Lana Batterina, who is a Russian oligarch. We knew that
there had been hints that there was a possible relationship there,
but we now have confirmation that in twenty fourteen she
sent three and a half million dollars to Hunter Biden.

(01:05:33):
And what's important to know here, Sean, is I mean,
this is a woman who is known to be connected
to Russian organized crime. You can find State Department cables
on it, you can find all kinds of public information.
It's an indication of the type of business they were
doing and who they were dealing. With so a bombshell
of a report, no question about it in my mind.

(01:05:54):
And by the way, all of it you chronicled, and
it is now corroborated from your book Secret Empires, John Solomon,
you spent two years doing this, and at times I've
got to admit I'd say, yah, John, we already know
there was a quid pro quo with Joe and zero
experienced Hunter, but you kept digging deeper than I even
was paying attention to. It is remarkable. And just think

(01:06:16):
about this. We impeached Democrats, impeach President Trump for asking
for an investigation into these very activities. We spent three
years investigating Don Trump Junior because he took a single
meeting with a Russian lawyer. Hunter Biden took three and
a half million dollars from a Russian oligarch identified in
US congressional legislation as someone who got her fortunes from

(01:06:37):
corrupt practices. He ye, go ahead, Hunter Biden. Yeah. The
very board that, the very company that Hunter Biden was
serving on the board at the moment he was serving
on the board allegedly paid a seven million dollar bride
to the Ukrainian prosecutors, who, by the way, were being
supervised by Joe Biden and the Obama administration. If these
things had happened in the Trump administration, they'd be on

(01:06:58):
the front page of the New York Times, leading breaking
news flashes on CNN. And today the corrupt, willfully ignorant
US media are ignoring these incredible revelations. And I wasn't
the only one concerned about him. Peter wasn't the only
one concerned about it. Senior officials in the Treasury Department
and State Department of Barack Obama's administration raised these red

(01:07:19):
flags four years ago, and they fell on deaf ears.
This is a scandal that will not get out unless
the American media steps up to the plate and finally
does its job. Greg Jared from a legal perspective, I mean,
on something that was basically made up with the Zalinsky call,
we now have real evidence of real impeachable offenses. If

(01:07:40):
Joe Biden, god forbid, every won this election in forty
one days based on democrats own quote standards, that's right,
John Sullivan and Peter Schweitzer White all along. Here's the
quote that jumps down from the report financial transactions identified
as potential criminal activity by her Biden. Did the FBI

(01:08:01):
investigate We don't know, because the FBI stonewalled those two
Center committees and they won't say. Another reason why I've
long argued that Christopher Ray needs to be fired. And
the other part of the equation is that four million
dollars from a Reason and went to Hunter Biden at

(01:08:22):
the very time the company the Reason is pressuring the
US to pressure Ukraine to set down the corruption investigation
of Boisma. Who applied the pressure? Joe Biden and Obama
administration officials, according to this report, not only ignore the
evidence in the warnings, but they turned a blind eye

(01:08:42):
to the potential extortion risks and undoe influence that could
have been applied to Joe Biden. So this is a
blockbuster report. You know. I know the world is paying
a lot of attention, and rightly so to what's happening
with does Brianna Taylor and everybody's talking a lot about
the presidential election. I know all of that is true,

(01:09:05):
and you know, but this is corruption at it on
a level and a degree that is unconscionable to me.
You know, Peter Schweitzer, when did you finally put out
secret Empires? Because it's been a while we've been covering
this and you came in I think my show first
and broke this story. You're absolutely right, Sean. It came
in March of twenty eighteen. You were the first one

(01:09:29):
to interview me on this, so I think, really it
has the attention and focus because you took an interest
in it. And look, the reason I take an interest
in corruption. I think the reason you take an interest
in exposing this stuff is we're a representative government and
the question is when we elect somebody, who were they
actually representing if they're engaged in corrupt relationships, people that

(01:09:51):
have made them money that they need to cover up,
that can be embarrassed, that can extort them, or can
bribe them to curry favor. What that means is you
elect a corrupt politician. They're not really representing you. They're
representing the people that are putting money in their pockets.
So what I would say is this is a central issue,
should be a part of the central conversation we're having today,

(01:10:14):
because corruption, to me, goes at the very heart of
the representative government that we're supposed to have. And the
bidens have avoided answering any questions about this. They have
lied repeatedly about the extent of the relationship, and I
think it's incumbent upon the media now to ask them
very hard, serious questions, the kind of questions that they've

(01:10:35):
asked the Trump's, that they've asked other political figures, but
seem reluctant to ask Joe Biden. I just where is
this now going? Because we're just at the interim report level.
Now it's going to be who knew what when? What
did they know? When did they know it? Why didn't
they speak out? How many fact witnesses will emerge here?
John Solomon? And how deep does it go with Russia?

(01:10:56):
How deep does it go with China? Last week I
put a whole bunch documents into the public domain that
I obtained under my lawsuits under FOYA. And the most
interesting thing that hasn't been picked up yet substantially is
that the Obama Biden National Security Council was on a
first name basis, first name basis with one of Barisma's
top executives, a guy named Vadan Politzarsky. Why was the

(01:11:19):
White House in the National Security Council in contact with
a Briesma official. Why was the State Department so acutely
aware of everything Bresma was doing. Here's the question that
Joe Biden has to answer. He has to be confronted,
and if the Trump administration has any documents on this,
they should release it immediately. Did Joe Biden any time
in his time a vice president have any meetings with

(01:11:42):
Barisma officials? There would be no reason for the White
House to know the Briesma officials unless someone in the
upper echelons of the White House knew an ad contacts
with Briesman. It wasn't just Hunter Biden. Joe Biden has
to answer. It's a simple question, yes or no. Did
you ever meet with anyone associated with Bresma? I think
he owes. I'll add one thing, John, I want to

(01:12:02):
know any transcripts of any phone calls that the vice
president might have had with high ranking officials in Russia, China,
or Ukraine. I think that would be a fair question.
And if it's good for Donald Trump to release them,
let's release them here, all right? Final thoughts Peter Schweitzer,
John Solomon, Greg Jarrett. We're watching. The protesting has gotten louder,

(01:12:24):
the crowds have gotten bigger. In Louisville, Kentucky, in response
to the grand jury decision from earlier today one officer,
three separate counts want and disregard endangerment issues. Nobody charged
directly in the death of Brianna Taylor. Obviously, it's it's

(01:12:45):
a very hot environment. There are prayers with the people
in Louisville tonight. I hope people are peaceful. I hope.
I hope people, you know, respect other people and their
property and innocent people are are not hurt here. It's
getting scary if we continue. Jarrett and Peter Schweitzer. Peter
Sweitzer did a great job based on the key findings
that we discovered today in his book Secret Empires, Greg

(01:13:08):
Jarrett breaking down the legal side of this. On the
legal side, where do you see vulnerability for Joe Biden
and other potentially you know, obviously Hunter Biden and Obama
administration officials. I think both Joe Biden and Hunter Biden
need to be put under oath. You have played the
sound bite of Joe Biden bragging about what it looks

(01:13:29):
to me like extortion and bribery and pressuring for the
firing of the prosecutor who was looking into purisma. So
you know, there has to be would seem how did
he communicate that demand that extortion to the Ukrainians. Well,
there's got to be a tape recording, so we should

(01:13:50):
hear the tape and see the transcript of that, and
he should be put under oath. You know, you did
a great job and a great service to the country,
Peter Schweitzer. You got to feel a bit vindicated today.
But with all that said, I mean, nobody on the
left has ever held accountable, are they? And I mean
it is beyond frustrating to me and Greg and John
and everybody. Well thank you, Sean. Yeah, it is very frustrating.

(01:14:14):
But I think we have to continue to press on.
I get people that email me sometimes and say, you know, look,
I'm kind of giving up because nothing ever happens. The
point is is that we need to continue to expose
this stuff. And I agree with Greg. I mean, there's
no reason why the Senate could not say, Hunter Biden,
you need to come up here and we're going to

(01:14:34):
put you under oath and you better bring documents and
material with you, and also Joe Biden for that matter,
because one of the things the Senate report makes clear
is that he altered his behavior because of his son's
commercial ties to Barisma, and we know that it influenced
his policy towards China. And there's a whole host of
other countries that we haven't even got to. I mean,

(01:14:56):
this was a veritable United Nations of corruption that Hunter
Biden was running and we need to get to the
bottom of it, expose it. The American people need to
know about it. All right, Great job, Peter Schweitzer, Greg Jared,
John Solomon who had to jump after the last break,
Thank you all. When we come back, we're still monitoring
the happenings in Louisville as we speak in reaction to

(01:15:17):
the grand jury decision in the Brianna Taylor Caves Leo Terrailways.
And next as we continue, we're in the swamp, We're
in DC. It's going to be an interesting Hannity nineties
and we hope you'll always say a DVR to join us.
Will continue. Freedom is never more than one generation away
from extinction. Ask not what your country can do for you,

(01:15:42):
ask what you can do for your country. He draws
his inspiration from US soldiers and the brave men and
women who wear the blue, the warriors who never run
from a fight. They run to it. And in this
fight to save the soul of our country, It's time
to awake the silent majority. Let this moment radicalize you.

(01:16:06):
The battle lines are drawn, the mission is clear, and
the time is upon us. With your help, for November third,
Republicans are going to win the House, win the Senate,
and again win the White House. When the brave are prepared.
There's no battle we can't win. Let's do this suit up,

(01:16:31):
Chin down, and He'll take the lead. This is the
Sean Hannity Show. After hearing the evidence from our team
of prosecutors, the grand jury voted to return in indictment
against Detective Hankinson for three counts of wanton endangerment for
wantonly placing the three individuals in Apartment three in danger

(01:16:54):
of serious physical injury or death. The charge one endangerment
in the first agree, is a Class D felony, and
if found guilty, the cues can serve up to five
years for each count. Kentucky law states that a person
is guilty of want and endangerment in the first degree
when under circumstances manifesting in strength difference to the value

(01:17:18):
of human life, he wantly engages in conduct which creates
a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to
another person. My office is prepared to prove these charges
at trial. However, it's important to note that he has
presumed innocent until proven guilty. Our investigations show and the

(01:17:42):
grand jury agreed that Mattingly and cause growth were justified
in the return of deadly fire after having been fired
upon by Kenneth Walker. Let me state that again, according
to Kentucky law, the use of force by Mattingly and
cause Grove was justified to protect themselves. This justification bars

(01:18:05):
us from pursuing criminal charges and Miss Brianna Taylor's death.
I know that many and in Louisville and across the
commonwealth in country have been anxiously awaiting the completion of
our investigation into the death of Miss Brianna Taylor. Prior
to this announcement, I spoke with Miss Palmer, Brianna Taylor's mother,

(01:18:31):
to share with her the results from the grand jury.
Many of you in this room know that I had
the opportunity last month to meet in person with her
and other members of Miss Taylor's family, including Miss Bianca
Austin and Miss Jenia Palmer. I want to once again
publicly express my condolences. Every day this family wakes up

(01:18:55):
to the realization that someone they loved is no longer
with them. There's nothing I can offer today to take
away the grief and heartache this family is experiencing as
a result of losing a child, a niece, a sister,

(01:19:16):
and a friend. The above named defendant, Brett Hankerson, committed
the offense of wanton endangerment in the first degree when
under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, he wantonly
shot a gun a gun, excuse me, into the apartment
occupied by initials c E count two Wanton endangerment in

(01:19:39):
the first degree, on or about March thirteenth, twenty twenty,
in Jefferson County, Kentucky. The above named defendant, Brett Hankerson,
committed the offense of wanton endangerment in the first degree
when under circumstances manifesting extreme and difference to human life,
he wantonly shot a gun into the apartment occupied by

(01:20:00):
initials c N Count three Wanton endangerment in the first degree,
on or about March thirteenth, twenty twenty, the Jefferson County.
In Jefferson County, Kentucky, the above named defendant, Brett Hankinson,
committed the offense of wanton endangerment in the first degree when,

(01:20:20):
under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, he wantonly
shot a gun into an apartment occupied by initials z
F against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
Mister foreperson, is that the decision of the grand jury?
Thank you all right? That was from earlier today. That

(01:20:42):
was the judge in the Brianna Taylor case announcing one
of the three officers, Brett Hankinson, committing wanton endangerment in
the first degree under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life.
There were a whole series of charges. The State DA
went through all of this, apparently with the grand jury.

(01:21:04):
There is a lot of tragedy to go on here.
Brianna Taylor's boyfriend somebody breaks into his house at a
legal firearm. He thought he was defending himself and his
family didn't know it was the police, apparently, and he
shot one of the officers. The police then fired back
and Brianna Taylor was hit eight times and she is

(01:21:25):
no longer with us. A woman with an incredible life story,
spent their whole adult life saving lives EMT two full
time jobs, loved by everybody. Now the question is, we've
been watching these protests in Louisville growing all day throughout
the day. I see people look at this. I'm looking
at it right now. Guys with you know, they have

(01:21:46):
their guns out. I'm not feeling good about what I see.
And I said this with guys in tactical gear that
showed up with their weapons drawn and their rifles drawn
in the Michigan State House, you know, it heightens tensions.
And this crowd has been growing by the minute. Leo
Terrell's civil rights attorney, is with us. Leo, you're you're

(01:22:11):
a lawyer, you're a civil rights activist. You got all
of this behind you. This is one of the most
one of the saddest cases I've ever heard. I always
don't rush to judgment. I wasn't there to hear all
the evidence. The grand jury is presented usually just one
side of the argument. There's no defense putting put up

(01:22:31):
all of the options in terms of possible charges. For example,
the criminal for criminal homicide offense is in Kentucky from
murder to manslaughter in the first degree, manslaughter's second degree
reckless homicide. And then you get down to what is
a considered a Class D felony, wanton endangerment in the
first degree that's actually Class D or wanton endangerment in

(01:22:56):
the second degree that would be a Class A misdemeanor.
And you look at the facts of this case, and
you look at the grand jury's decision, what you know,
what are your thoughts? Well, I'll tell you right now, John,
you do an excellent job of summarizing all the facts
for your listeners. And this is in my wheelhouse, has
Siml Rights attorney for thirty years. I see police officers,
and I'll tell you right now, you're correct. This is

(01:23:19):
a tragedy when you look at the death of Brianna Taylor.
You're absolutely right what I'm upset about on the point
of what's going to happen in Louisville to night throughout
the country. When you have social media influencer Ben Crump
sending out a tweet saying this is injustice, even though
he picked up a twelve million dollars check on behalf
of the family last week. Here's the legal issue. These

(01:23:40):
the Brianna Taylor's boyfriend fired the weapon at the officers,
struck the officers. The officers have a legal right to
respond to defend themselves self defense, and that self defense
argument negates eady intent to murder Brianna. That's why the

(01:24:01):
murder charges, the man slaughter chargers are out the windows.
You cannot have it. The officers had a legitimate legal
right to fire their weapon. The charge against the one
officer because he shot recklessly, it's almost those almost like
driving drunk in a car. If you notice, the charges
were because he fired his weapon and it entered the

(01:24:22):
other apartment. The bomb line is, this is what's going
to raise people. There is no murder charge, no culpability
for the death of Rihanna Taylor. And so these three
wafted charges are against the officer firing his weapon that
went into other apartments. Overall tragedy, overall Black Lives Matter

(01:24:43):
will use this to exploit the race card, and we're
going to be having to cross our fingers hoping that
we have a calm evenate in Louisville. Well, it's not
looking good. They've been watching these videos all day and
and and this look you're talking about the embodiment of
what makes America great. Brianna Taylor is devoted her life

(01:25:07):
and said so that it was her passion, her calling
in life to save other people. Amt work, two jobs, amazing,
loved by everybody that knew her. I mean, now, when
the law intersects in this mess, you know what is
a grand jury to do? Well, I'll tell you, Sean,
and I'll use someone in phrase that you have coined.
Brianna Taylor was a great American. She spent her life

(01:25:28):
saving lives. She is a model citizen. It is a tragedy.
One thing that we did learn by listening to the
Attorney General. There is a civilian witness who did hear
the officers announced that they were police officers. But again,
what people will refuse to understand, those who want to
create chaos, is that these officers were fired upon and

(01:25:51):
they have a legal right to defend themselves. Here's the
other hitch. You gotta ran Paul who's trying to eliminate
no knock warrant and he's attacked by these Black Lives
Matter protesters. You got Tim Scott and to the President
trying to get police reform to get rid of that
one or one and a half percent of bad officers.
You have the Democrats blocking this. So what do we
learn from this? Where do we go from this? We

(01:26:13):
try to improve the system to weed out bad officers,
but what's going to happen is you're going to have
these social media influencers profit teers and Black Lives Matter?
Who's going to profit from this and burn down cities?
And that is wrong. We got to look forward, and
what is forward is we have to accept that we're

(01:26:33):
a nation of laws. The Attorney in General laid out
all the facts and we have to ask for a
calm and peace and reform. But that's not what we're
going to get from the extreme left, John Hannity, do
you see a racial component here? Which I think many
people are making the point that it seems like it is.
Do you see it? Do I see? No? No, I

(01:26:55):
don't see it. But for Black Lives Matter, they got
the perfect storm, three white officers, two black individuals. They
love this. Do I see any racial animists and these
officers executed their warrant? No? I don't. I absolutely don't.
And I believe that that grand jury and this Attorney
General who is black would have falled out because they

(01:27:16):
did a thorough investigation, they cooperated with the FBI, and
they're doing an ongoing investigation. So I don't see any
racial animists from the officers, but that will not stop
Black Lives Matter, the extremist group because the scenario of
white officers black victims, that's what they want, Black on
black crime. They don't care about black police officers. They

(01:27:36):
don't care about this is what they like, and this
is what's going to cause or ignite the rioting and
the chaos for the next couple of nights. I hope
I'm drawing on that issue. Look, well, no, very soon.
They have a curfew that's supposed to go into place
nine pm. Easter. That's when I come up on the air.
You'll be on the show tonight. And I wish I
could report that I'm not feeling good considering that the

(01:27:59):
crowds that have grown by the second all afternoon as
we've been on the air here today. I don't feel
good about the odds there. I don't. I don't. I
don't feel good either. Look, the central government boarded up
federal buildings. There's a turfew. It's going to be ignored.
The streets are clear as far as driving the streets

(01:28:20):
in Louisville, there are going to be people who are
going to be fueled. And again I want to say
this for all your listeners. There are so called agitators
who are tweety, who are using social media to show
their outrage, come out and burn and loot. It doesn't
help anyone. It doesn't help Brianna Taylor, it doesn't help
her legacy. It doesn't help it at all. And there's

(01:28:42):
a distinction between Brihanna Taylor and Jacob Blake and George Floyd.
And you know what it is is what you said earlier.
This woman was a great American. She saved lives, she
was in her own home. That's the tragic part of it.
Will you see it? I see it. But agitators are
going to use it to explore and justify the bernie
and looty and that's offensive to me. Well it is

(01:29:04):
to me too. And you know, you'd think we could
all unite. I don't know, you know, I've always talked
about what are the alternatives? All right? I'd like to
see more training for police officers, um, you know, I'd
like to see non lethal alternatives, more more martial arts training.
You know how into martial arts I am. You know
I've talked about this burner gun, you know, which shoots pepperballs,

(01:29:26):
sprays and tear gas. You know, I'd like cops to
have it. But it's not going to bring back Brianna Taylor.
Is it sad? And it's they're not gonna be able
to undo this, but I gotta run. Leo, thank you
as always for being one of appreciated eight hundred and
nine for one Sean if you want to be a
part of the program City DVR. I mean, my prayers
are with the people Louisville tonight. I'm with this country.

(01:29:48):
We really need to stop and end this madness, this violence.
It's not gonna be That's not the answer. It's not
helping anybody to burn down stores in Luton and heard
innocent people very scary times. All Right, that's gonna wrap
things up for today. All Right, A lot obviously going
on still in Louisville as we get reaction from the

(01:30:09):
grand jury decision in the Brianna Taylor case. We got
our Barisma investigation. This is a beatdown of Hunter and
Joe Biden. They're not going to avoid this news, even
with the Brianna Taylor issue also in the news. Tonight,
we'll have coverage of everything. The latest in the battle
for the Supreme Court. Looks like the President has the votes. Well,

(01:30:32):
full coverage of all of that. It's forty one days
till election day. This the defining tipping point election in
our lifetime. We'll have the best radio and TV coverage
every night between now and then and beyond. Anyway, We'll
see you tonight, say a dv Our ninety Eastern Haniday
of Fox. We'll be live as the curfews supposedly goes
into effect, and we'll see it tonight. We'll be back

(01:30:54):
here tomorrow. Thank you as always for being with us.
Tomorrow forty days till you're the ultimate jury. Thanks for
being with us.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Sean Hannity Show News

Host

Sean Hannity

Popular Podcasts

United States of Kennedy

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Senator Cruz: History Is With President Trump