Senator Rand Paul - November 21st, Hour 3

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky takes us through the side of the investigations with Rep. Jordan and Comer. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Stay right here for our final News round Up and
Information Overload. All right, News round Up, Information Overload hour
on the Sean Hannity Show. And we have so many
investigations coming up, and you know, it's getting very very interesting.
If you watch and listen to what James Comer and
what Jim Jordan laid out, there are a couple of
very significant investigations that are going on. Not the least

(00:24):
of it, which is the FBI is a politicize We
have all these whistleblowers that say it is. We already
knew that fact, you know. We know, for example, with
Hillary Clinton's dirty dossier, we know that they offered Christopher
Steele in early October of twenty sixteen a million dollars
if he could corroborate it. He didn't, but by the

(00:44):
end of October became the foundation of the FISA application
on the top of a FIES application that says verified
we now know is all unverifiabol and because he would
have taken the million bucks and corroborated it for the FBI.
But you know, as Andrew McCabe, the Deputy FBI director, said,
there's no FISA application improved without the dossier, and then

(01:07):
when they talk to the subsource in January twenty seventeen,
a guy by the name of dan Chenko, it turns
out he says, no, none of this is true. He
was the main source for Christopher Steele. And what were
the consequences for him at the time he got put
on the FBI payroll? And then they kept using the
dirty dossier as the bulk of information to get the

(01:28):
FISA applications approved. The FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop long
before any of us knew about it, three weeks before
the twenty twenty election. This is two elections in a row.
Now that the FBI is presidential elections, they're putting their
thumb on the scale in favor of the Democrats. So
it's time for an investigation. Similarly, the investigations now moving

(01:51):
into the Biden family syndicate business and where this ends,
where this goes, I can't say for sure, and I
know that Rampaul, if they there would have been complimentary
investigations and the Senate had Republicans taken the Senate. But
let's see what happens. That could happen in due course.
Senator ram Paul's with us. Now, how are you sir

(02:12):
good John, thanks for having me here. Let's get your thoughts.
We have all of these whistleblowers, and the headline is
that they're screaming at congressional investigators that the FBI has
been politicized and the DJ's weaponized. I think the fact
that they had Hunter Biden's laptop for as long as
they've had it, I mean, these these investigations will run

(02:35):
parallel with each other. I think is pretty evident that, well,
if your last name is Clinton, you don't get in trouble.
If your last name is Biden, you don't get in trouble.
But if you're a conservative, God help you. I think
without question, the FBI has become politicized. It's pervasive. There's
a great deal of evidence that they've been in collusion
with big tech to censor speech. I brought up with

(02:56):
Chris with Director Ray in committee just this week, the
fact that there was a story in the New York
Posts saying that Facebook is giving up personal information to
the FBI. The FBI then reads that information, then sends
it to its agents, and uses that information as a
predicate to then file warrants to get the information they've

(03:16):
already been given The problem with this is that it's
against the law. We have a law called the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act from nineteen eighty six, and that law
forbids Facebook and others who have your personal information from
giving it to anyone, including the government, unless there is
a warrant or a subpoena for it. So if Facebook
is doing this, it's illegal. The FBI was quoted in

(03:39):
the New York Post article as saying, yeah, they're giving
us information, but on foreign actors. So I asked, ray,
is it foreign actors or is it American actors? Does
it involve speech? Does it involve people like me who
think that there were irregularities, if not downright problems with
the twenty twenty election. And he wouldn't answer the question.
He says he doesn't know, but he says I can

(04:01):
be assured that he's following the law. But he wouldn't
answer the questions specifically, are you receiving information from Facebook?
Because I believe if you were to say yes, it's illegal.
And we'll send questions in writing to him and his
team and about six months from now they'll answer with
an non answer. So this is unacceptable and we can't
let it go on this way. Let me play this.

(04:21):
This is Christopher Ray actually answering your question on this.
Let me let me shed some more light on it,
Dredge Ray, is Facebook or any other social media company
supplying private messages or data on American users that is
not compelled by the government or the FBI. Not compelled

(04:42):
Miller is not in response to the legal process, No warrant,
no subpoena. They're just supplying you information on their users.
I don't believe so, but I can't said here and
be sure of that as I said here, all right,
So there you have it. So, Senator, I ask you,
you know why why can't they answer that question? Well,

(05:02):
I think that the answer is very, very murky, and
probably that they're being dishonest with us. They admitted, the
FBI admitted to the Earth Post. They responded to the
article and said, oh, yes, Facebook is giving us stuff.
We also have reports. You know that the FBI went
to Facebook gave them information to try to prevent them

(05:22):
from publicizing anything about the Hunter Biden laptop. So yes,
if there is a conspiracy or if there is an
involvement of a government entity trying to influence an election,
it's our government. It's the FBI. What they did to
Ron Johnson was unconscionable. They had a meeting with him,
a private meeting, and then later released to the voters
of Wisconsin and said somehow Ron Johnson was feeding Russian disinformation.

(05:48):
So now you have the f by getting involved in
Ron Johnson Senate race and end up being a very
close race, and he's one of the fighters. Were fortunate
that he won, But it wasn't for lack of the
FBI getting involved. And so for all their talk of
going after you conspiracy, going after insurrectionists, and going after
all these people, they're the ones getting involved in mucking

(06:09):
up our elections. Not Russia, but the actual FBI is
involved in our own elections. Well, obviously they put their
thumb on the scales in twenty sixteen and in twenty twenty,
and then of course then you have social media companies
and giants, and they wouldn't even let people read the
story about Hunter Biden's laptop that turned out to be true.
The dossier turned out to be completely debunked. Coomer said,

(06:33):
now if you go back into the issue of Joe
Biden and his relationship with Hunter, he said numerous times
that he never had a single conversation with Hunter about
his foreign business dealings. But we have photograph after photograph
that shows Biden pictured with his son and his foreign
business partners. We have accumulated a list of at least
fourteen meetings that took place between twenty ten and twenty eighteen.

(06:57):
The Republican Congress rightly is demanding. But the amount of money.
We're talking about a one point five billion dollars deal
with the Bank of China, one hundred million dollars from
the former first Lady of Moscow, you know, leveraging a
billion taxpayer dollars to Ukraine to get a prosecutor fired.
It turns out as investigating his son being paid millions
with no experience at all whatsoever. I could just this

(07:22):
had any Republicans name on it, Democrats would be all
over it. Now, Khmer said, this is an investigation into
Joe Biden, the President of the United States. Our investigation
is about Joe Biden. Now, is it a fair conclusion
to think that while you're simultaneously canceling the Keystone XL
pipeline but giving Vladimir Putin a waiver on a Nordstream

(07:44):
two pipeline. Could that be because of the fact that
the Biden family is compromised, that Joe Biden himself is compromised.
I think the question is a valid question, and I
think there could be a forensic look at all of
the financial dealings of Hunter Biden. Clearly, it appears on
the surface it seems like Hunter and Joe Biden, not
just Hunter. Well. I think the look at at Hunter

(08:06):
Biden's finances is in order because of the evidence, and
so I think you can get court orders to do
that as part of an investigation. I think that the
things that Hunter Biden's been accused of are every bit
as bad or worse than the things they accused Paul
Manaford of, and they were able to get not only
access to Manaforts records, they ultimately convicted Manaphort and gave
him a significant time. From what I've seen, everything that

(08:29):
the evidence points towards and Hunter Biden is equally as
bad or worse. And once you have the ability to
investigate Hunter Biden's finances, then the question will be is
their connection to a big guy. Is the big guy
his father one of their financial disbursements from Hunter Biden,
or was he carrying the money around in cash to
the big guy. But really, well it goes beyond that

(08:50):
because Hunter implicates Joe numerous times in this laptop. He
implicates him complaining that he has to give Pops half
his salary. Tony bob Olenski affirmed that he was in
a meeting with both of them and that his father
had intimate knowledge of all a lot of the business
dealings in that particular case with China complaining about having
to you know, put aside, he's the one that confirmed

(09:12):
that the big guy is in fact Joe Biden. Which
thing is as I meet voters every day who are
coming up to me and they're worried about our country
in a big way, worries such that there's getting to
be two forms of justice, that you can be prosecuted
based on who you are, what political party you represent,
and that it's a different set of justice for Republicans.
You know, Republicans are you know, frog marched out in

(09:33):
their underwear with their hands behind their back, handcuffed, whereas
Democrats like Hunter Biden, it's basically ignored. So you know
that if we want to believe in equal justice, you know,
before the law We've got to believe that, you know,
the FBI is not going after Republicans, They're not going
after our speech. So I have a bill that we're

(09:53):
going to introduce in the near future that gets around
the question of how much we can regulate big tech
and go straight to the source and says we can
regulate big government in any way we see fit. And
so my bill will say that it will prevent and
prohibit the federal government from colluding with big tech. It
says that federal government cannot collude with big tech tech

(10:16):
to censor speech, and that the big government big government
cannot purchase lists. I am worried that what is happening
now is that they're a publicly available list that are anonymous,
so I can find out, you know, who likes these
kinds of these Nike shoes, and I can sell them
digital advertising. That's the way the internet works. But my
concern is the government is purchasing those lists and then

(10:38):
getting through the veil of anonymity to actually put individual
names to lists and is able to characterize in profile
American citizens based on a whole host of things that
are public but anonymous. And I asked that question to
Ray in the committee, and once again he didn't answer.
I said, are you purchasing lists of Americans that are
anonymous and then using technology to ben attract the veil

(11:01):
of anonymity to discover who those individuals are? If they're
doing this, this is really akin to the minority or
reportant precogs and going after people based on who they are,
non based on crime. And it's a very dangerous step
that's happening. Oh, it seems extremely dangerous, and especially in
light of the last two elections. Quick break Mooreward. Senator

(11:22):
Rampaul on the other side, eight hundred and nine four
one seawn our number. If you want to be a
part of the program. Look, all of you have helped
build my Pillow into the incredible company it is today. Look,
without these products, I wouldn't fall asleep as fast as
I do, or stay asleep as long as I do.
It's help my sleeping dramatically. If you've never tried their
Geza Dream sheets, you're gonna love them. The softest, softest

(11:43):
sheets you'll ever sleep on. It's made from the world's
best cotton. Geza, extremely durable but yep, ultrasoft and breathable
and right now Geza dream sheets are at their lowest
price ever, coming in as low as twenty nine ninety
nine when you go to the Sean Hannity Square at
my pillow dot Com. It's that simple. Every my pillow
product has a ten year warranty. They've extended for the

(12:04):
holiday season. They're sixty day unconditional money back guarantee. If
you place an order between now and Christmas, they'll have
your money back guarantee extended until March first, twenty twenty three.
If you want, you can call them mention my name
eight hundred nine nine zero nine zero, or just go
to my pillow dot com click on the Sean Hannity Square.
They have other deep discounts on other great mind pillow products.

(12:27):
But go there and that when those products arrived, the
sleep you've been wanting, needing, craving, desiring, deserving will be yours.
My pillow dot Com, Sean Hannity Square. Joe Biden can't
spell it, and he can't keep them for the American people.

(12:47):
Check out the Sean Hannity jobs for them today. Now
Hannity's on coast to coast. We continue now with Kentucky
Senator Ram Paul Do you think and agree with me
that if in fact we get to the bottom of this,
we'll find that not only did Hillary get a break
from the FBI, that in fact, the pidents have gotten

(13:10):
a break from the FBI, and the FBI has gotten
a break from the FBI, and as much as they
don't go after their own and that you know the
actions taken. Like for example, if I lied before a
court and I say something's verified, and in fact we
know that it's not verified, isn't that lying to a court,
especially on something as you know, powerful as a fizz

(13:30):
of warrant application. I think, without question the FBI is
riddled with political figures and the politicization of crime. And
I think that's really sad and disappointing, because you know,
many of us want to believe that federal law enforcements
should be above politics. For a long time people thought,
you know, they were, but now it's become apparent. I mean,

(13:53):
from Peter Strock and his girlfriend all the way up
that you had, you know, a whole team of high
level people who were simply Trump haid, deranged by their
hatred of Trump and would do anything, including using the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to go after Trump's campaign. So
you know, I've been fighting this battle a long time.
Libertarians were opposed to fight that even before it was

(14:14):
a Trump But our prediction was that eventually things that
were said to be used against terrorists, And my dad
said this right after nine eleven. He said, the Patriot
Act will be used ostensibly to after terrorists, but in
the end it will be used against our own people.
And that's what I ultimately came to fruition with Trump
in twenty sixteen, is these tools that were given to government,

(14:35):
these powers that were given to government to keep us
safe to go after terrorists, were then turned and used
on our own citizens. And this is a terrible place
to be, and it's why we always have to be
suspect of centralization and concentration of power. Well, I will,
I will humbly admit that I was wrong. I just
thought after nine eleven it made sense to have the
ability to go after people abroad, and if, in fact,

(14:59):
you know, we needed to get an application approved, I
just assumed that there would be integrity in the process.
I always viewed the FBI as the premier law enforcement
agency in the world. Turns out the Senator that I'm wrong. Well,
there are ways to reform it. I'm not against using
our tools of intelligence to try to prevent people from
attacking us. So, for example, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court,

(15:22):
we should just apply it to foreign nurse rankly, that's
what it's supposed to be. So the Constitution, if you're
somewhere in Libya or Iran or Iraq and you're plotting
against this, the fact that we can surveil you and
listen to you don't have constitutional protections. But if you
work for a political candidate or you're an American, if
you're in America, you can't just surveil these people without

(15:43):
a Fourth Amendment warrant, a constitutional warrant. And this is
something Ray fundamentally doesn't get either. So Ray is sort
of from this camp of you know, sort of this
Liz Chain camp of whatever goes. And these people think that, oh, well, yeah,
that's just fine, but the Constitution doesn't apply. I do
a fies a warrant. They have a lower standard. You
don't have the Fourth Amendment to get a warrant. All

(16:04):
you have to do is say probable calls of a
relationship to a foreign government. But half of the people
in our foreign policy world in America, Americans have had
involvement or discussions with people overseas would somehow be caught
up in that web. And it wouldn't be fair or
right of a government invading all of their privacy and
their phone calls and investigating them like they did the
Trump campaign. So I think there's a way you fix five.

(16:27):
So you just say fizes not for Americans. If you
want to spine an American, you go to a court,
and occasionally the court courts actually all the time allow
wire taps undrug dealers and this and that. You can
get a wire tap from a federal judge. But it's
an American court under the Constitution then, and not a
foreign warrant that doesn't have the constitutional protections. All right,
Ram Paul, appreciate you being with us. Eight hundred nine

(16:48):
four one, Shawn, if you want to be a part
of the program, we'll get an update on a story
from about this new special council appointed by the Attorney
General Americ carlm. We come back continuing the mission of
saving America. As we returned to the Sean Show hight
twenty five to the top of the hour, we'll get

(17:10):
to your calls. Here in a minute, I want to
update you on a story justinnews dot com. Well, you've
heard the name of the special prosecutor, Jack Smith. There
is a justinnews dot com article though, that points out
that this new special Council or special prosecutor was once
overturned by the US Supreme Court and also tied to

(17:33):
the IRS scandal. That's the one with with Lois Lerner
and the targeting of conservative groups, which makes this pretty interesting.
And when you go into the different aspects of this,
there's a lot more to this than meets the eye.
You might remember that there was a conviction of former
Governor of Virginia Bob McDonald, conviction on eleven felony counts.

(17:58):
The Supreme Court reversed that convey and a pretty stunning
loss for the DOJ, concluding the definition of public acts,
in other words, that the family accepted gifts in return
for official public acts. But the definition of public acts
used by the prosecutor's team led by this guy, Jack Smith,

(18:19):
it went on to say, was unconstitutional and exceeded the
definition of bribery statutes. So that's pretty interesting. In twenty fourteen,
the House Oversight Committee concluded that during Smith's earlier stint
at the DOJ, he set up a critical meeting between
the Department of the between his department and i R
S official lowest learner that's set in motion the targeting

(18:41):
of conservative nonprofits that became one of the scandals that
were signature in the Obama administration. Anyway, John Solomon broke
this story, joins us, Now, how are you, sir? I
am Welshaw, good to be with you. Well, I guess
we can only conclude here we go again. I mean,
you have people that obviously don't have the best track
track records, people with a clear agenda that are now

(19:05):
at the HELM and what will be a probably long
and drawn out investigation yet again into Donald Trump. Yeah,
listen that Jack Smith is a name that rings big
in my memory banks because twice in the last decade
he came across my radar as an investigative report. The
first time when he was supervising the Public Integrity Section,
that's the anti corruption section of the Justice Department. And

(19:27):
he brought this case against Bob McDonald. And after I
got the conviction, it went to the Supreme Court. Supreme
Court slapped them down in hard basically said, you stretched
the law, you made up your own definition, you went
beyond the law. You pushed the envelope. Well, he also
pushed the envelope. It turns out, back in twenty ten,
right at the ignition point of the Lowest Learner IRS scandal,

(19:49):
all the evidence that the House and the Senate came
up with and looking at, how did the IRIS get
the idea to target conservative nonprofit groups and unlawfully go
after them? Well, it started with an email that ja fact,
I just dug this up out of my whole notes
and just a little bit of go Sean jack Smith
sends an email in September twenty ten saying, Hey, what

(20:10):
about the idea of charging conspiracies or bringing conspiracy of
cases against any conservative nonprofit group that tries to get
involved in politics. This is right in the aftermath of
the famous citizens United Supreme Court ruling that basically freed
up spending in elections, and he's trying to conjure up, Hey,

(20:31):
maybe we can stretch the law here. So I'm familiar
when you think about the McDonald ruling to try to
bring conspiracy cases. That email prompts a meeting with the IRS.
The Justice Department goes over meets with lowest learner, and
that starts the IRS on its great witch hunt against nonprofits,
something that the Treasury Inspector General ultimately concluded was an
improper use of the IRS resources. So he's at the

(20:54):
ignition point of the lowest learner IRS scandal and he's
on the losing side of a Supreme Court rebuke. And
in both cases you see a prosecutor trying to push
the envelope, trying to interpret the law more aggressively than
perhaps Congress or the courts were prepared to do. So.
The question is, obviously Murra Growland had to know this
about his past, why do you think he then appointed him.

(21:15):
It's a great question, right, I guess only the Attorney
General knows why. And when the Attorney General announced him
on front, he said, this is a very well respected
a prosecutor. It's true he's been at the Hague for
a couple of years pursuing war crimes, and so that's
always a noble endeavor. But anyone who did a Google search,
to anyone who knew anything about the last ten or
twelve years of the Justice Department knows that Jack Smith

(21:38):
is a figure that has at least on two occasions
been accused of stretching the law, and in both cases
to the detriment of conservatives. And what is he doing now?
He's going to be investigating a conservative former President Donald
Trump just has to raise concerns. I just had a
conversation a few minutes ago so with James Comer, he's
the incoming House Oversight Committee chairman, and he says he

(22:00):
thinks that Jack Smith is the wrong thing, that Merrick
Garland made a bad decision here. It's going to cast
less credibility on the investigation in more doubt about the
politicization of the Justice Department. What do you make about
the two investigations and the thirty one pages put out
by Colmer in terms of where he is headed in
his investigation of the bidens, because he was very clear

(22:22):
he went through a lot of the details about how
Joe Biden personally participated in meetings and phone calls. We
have photographic evidence. We also have implications on Hunter's laptop
against his own father, and one hundred and fifty reports
that were given by banks they called suspicious activity reports

(22:42):
or SAR reports, and that was handed over to the
Treasury Department, and then he says very clearly, this is
an investigation of Joe Biden, the President of the United States,
why he lied to the American people about his knowledge
and participation in the family's international business schemes. And at
that time he said he would like to speak with
Hunter and Joe Biden. He seems to have pulled back

(23:05):
on the Joe Biden part of that, but said, again,
our investigation is about Joe Biden. Now what was interesting
is we've been watching apparently this grand jury convened in
Delaware and nothing's happened. You know. They seem to go
dovetail very fluidly into the investigation of the House Judiciary Committee,
and that would be Jim Jordan, and they'll look it

(23:27):
into whether or not the FBI has been politicized and
the DOJ has been weaponized. So they seem complimentary to me,
at least on paper. James Comer says that they're cooperating
each other. When Commerce staff finds something to suggests a
Justice Department did something wrong, they send it over Judiciary.
When Judiciary finds something wrong about Hunter Biden, they send
it over to a Commerce The Comer is going to

(23:48):
focus on the behavior of the Biden family and how
they got rich in a pay to play stream, and
Jordan is going to focus on did the Justice Department
drop the ball, try to stop or block or slow
walking investigation that might have led to criminal charges against
Hunter Biden. Here's the big thing I think I learned today.
I was talking to Comer and doing some research. James

(24:09):
Comer said, one of the reasons they're so interested in
getting those suspicious activity reports that they have strong evidence
now that Hunter Biden was subsidizing his father's lifestyle. So
when Joe Biden is the vice president, according to James Comer,
the committee has evidence that Hunter Biden was subsidizing his lifestyle,
in some cases paying utility and phone bills. In another

(24:31):
case apparently doing his taxes and getting a refund back
from Joe Biden. As we already know a lot of
this from the laptop. I mean, he implicates, he complains
about paying for his father's repair bills and construction bills
at his house. He compares about having to give half
his income to quote Pops the Big Guy has been
corroborated by Tony bob Olenski. I mean, it's crazy that

(24:54):
we're actually still talking about this two years after I've
come public a thousand percent. Joe Biden is the big
guy congressman comer address it this morning. There is a
trova facts. And the good news for the American people
is not only have I come forward, but in the
last variety of months, multiple whistleblowers have come forward with

(25:15):
a whole trova facts that collaborate everything I've said, as
well as add incremental information to it. And I think
the American people are gonna see those facts. I think
they're gonna be shocked by those facts, and hopefully justice
is served. And then again, he claimed he never once
talked to Hunter about his farm business dealings, depressing, how
many times have you ever spoken to your son about

(25:36):
his overseas business dealings. I've never stoken my son about
his overseas for the series, I have never discussed with
my son, or my brother or anyone else in the
him to do with their business is period. And what
I will do is the same thing we did in
our administration gent be an absolute wall between personal and
private and the governments. Do you stand your statement that

(26:00):
you did not discuss any of your son's overseas business
charge stand by that statement. There are at least fourteen
meetings that I know of that have been identified where
Joe Hunter and foreign business partners met with each other,
and there's many photographs of such meetings. Well, the bank
records will show at what point did a money come
in from a foreign source and at one point did

(26:21):
a money go back out from Hunter Biden to his dad,
making a clear link from foreign money in and benefit
back to Joe Biden. That is where the committee wants
to get. They want to be able to prove not
just through the inference of the emails, but in the
following the money trail that Joe Biden was the beneficiary
of some of this foreign money coming in. That's why
those suspicious activity reports have become so important to the

(26:43):
early investigation by James Comber. Okay, now, there are a
lot of people, including myself that after the FBI put
and the dj put the thumbs on the scales and
two presidential elections in twenty it was the Hillary Clinton
you know, dirty dossier, and they used it to acquire

(27:04):
the FIES application, even after Christopher Steele couldn't corroborate it
even for a million dollar offer, And they did that
in early February, early October. By late October they used
it as the bulk of information. Andrew McCabe confirmed without it,
they wouldn't have gotten the FIES application, all right, So
they put their thumb on the scale. In twenty sixteen,
they put their thumb on the scale by saying that

(27:25):
the Hunter Biden laptop, which the FBI had long before
the three weeks it was exposed by the New York Post.
They put their thumb on the scale of the elections
then two. And my question is that there are many
of us to look at this, and if you're Biden,
you don't get in trouble. If you're a Clinton, you
don't get in trouble. If you're in the FBI deep state,
you don't get in trouble. You know, why would we

(27:46):
think this time is going to be any different? Yeah, listen,
that is a great question. And the only thing you
can imagine happening is that Congress will ask such forceful questions,
learn even in greater detail, the amount of criminality that
has been substantiated by the Justice Department, and try to
shame the Justice Department into taking an action that it

(28:06):
hasn't taken in four years. It's very important. The FBI
and the Justice Department first opened the Hunter Biden investigation
in twenty eighteen, and by the way, they first got
word that Hunter Biden hadn't paid his taxes on the
Ukrainian money back in twenty sixteen. I have those emails.
I've made those public. So for six years, the Justice
Department has known all the evidence that you and I

(28:27):
but learning piecemeal through the laptop and now through James Comer.
The only thing I think Republicans are hoping is maybe
shame the Justice Department into finally taking the action. Well,
here's the next question, because they've delayed it so long.
Are we up against the statute of limitations that if
there's a conspiracy charge, conspiracy charge would get beyond the
typical five year statute of limitations. And we understand, we've

(28:49):
understood for some time that that's one of the things
they've been looking at, conspiracy to evade multiple laws, that
it was part of a larger scheme in which a
conspiracy is the proper thing. So if there's a conspiracy charge,
the statute doesn't aply. So I'm asking you to take
off your reporter hat, your investigative reporter had for a
second and just give an opinion. I mean, it seems

(29:10):
to me that equal justice and equal application of our
laws no longer exists in America. I don't see it,
and I really believe it. It's so unfortunate, but it's
also dangerous to this great republic. Yeah. I was out
in western Maryland just a few days ago, and a
gentleman came up to me in a McDonald's and stopped
to get a coffee on the way back, and he

(29:31):
recognized me from Show Sean and he said, John, when
I see an FBI agent thirty years ago, I used
to say, thank you for serving, and I'm so proud.
And today I'm afraid to go up to him for
fear that I'll say something he'll arrest me. That's not
the America I want to live in. And I thought, well, one,
an amazing thing for someone to say. I think that
the average American who's out there just trying to make

(29:51):
ends meet, trying to survive the Biden economy, they don't
like what's happened to the FBI. They can see it.
They don't need to be told anymore evidence. They want
somebody to fix it. And the Republicans have a chance
with Jim Jordan to go in and fundamentally fix the FBI.
Go ask the questions, get the resources, maybe defund some
people if they don't want to listen to the law.

(30:12):
But they have to do something because the American public
no longer trust the lead law enforcement agency in America
should be the premier law enforcement agency in the entire world.
That's the problem with it all. Well, great reporting just
thenews dot com. Oh yeah, one other story today. You're
telling me about your breaking What are you breaking today? Yeah,
just a little bit. Ago, Marco Rubio and Chip Roy

(30:34):
put out a remarkable report looking at all the different
ways that liberal ideology has been indoctrinating the Pentagon under
Joe Biden and tying it to drops in readiness and
preparedness in the army. Basically, we are less capable war
fighting machine two years into the Biden administration because of
so much focus on pronouns and critical race theory and

(30:56):
other things. They even got it down into the special Forces.
Who would think that the special forces would be affected
by these sort of things, but they're injecting it into
the special Forces, into the military academies, into the national
security strategy, liberal indoctrination, very powerful report. Just broke that
up on Just the News a little bit ago from
Congressman Chip Roy and Senator Marco Rubio. Makes some really

(31:17):
powerful points in really strong evidence of what's going on.
John Solomon, editor in chief, justa News dot Com investigative reporter.
Thank you for that update, John, appreciate it. Thanks Sehn
All Right, that's going to wrap things up at tonight,
Hannity ninety Eastern on Fox. Senator John Kennedy, knwke Ingrid,
Sarah Sanders, John Solomon, Jonathan Turley, we got it all
news you'll never get from the media. Moob nine Eastern SEDVR, Hannity,

(31:41):
Fox News, see you tonight, back here tomorrow. Thank you
for making this show possible.