The Trump Interview - 6.13

Listen to Sean's full interview with President Trump! Plus, former CIA operative and Fox News contributor, Daniel Hoffman stops by the show to discuss the true impact of the North Korean summit and just why President Trump was uniquely qualified to pull it off. The Sean Hannity Show is on weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com.

Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Let not your heart be troubled. You are listening to
the Sean Hannity Radio Show podcast. If you're like me
and suffer from insomnia, you know what, that's not fun.
You know I tried everything I couldn't get a good
night's sleep. And this is neither drug nor alcohol induced.
That's right. It is my pillow. Mike Lindell invented it
and he fitted me for my first my pillow, and

(00:20):
it's changed my life. I fall asleep faster, stay asleep longer,
and the good news you can too, Lea. Go to
my pillow dot com promo code Sean and take advantage
of one of Mike Glendell's best offers, his special four pack.
You get fifty percent off to my Pillow Premium Pillows
to go Anywhere Pillows. My Pillows made in the USA,
has a sixty day unconditional money back guaranteed no risk

(00:40):
to you, and attend you warranty. You don't want to
spend more sleepless nights on a pillow tossing interney that's
not working for you. Just go to my pillow dot
com right now, use the promo code Sean and you
get Mike Glendell's special four pack. You get to my
Pillow Premium Pillows to go Anywhere pillows fifty percent off,
and you'll start getting the kind of peaceful and RESTful
and comfortable and deep, peeling and recruitative sleep you've been

(01:02):
craving and deserve. My pillow dot Com promo coach SHN
Happy Wednesday. Glad you're with us. Yeah, we are still
in Singapore three a m. Local time. I'm actually getting
used to the time, and of course three pm on
the East coast of the United States where we can't
wait to get back a lot of us anyway, uh,
in spite of the great Southern cooking we actually found

(01:23):
here in Singapore, which was fun. Glad you're with us.
Eight nine one, Shawn, If you want to be a
part of the program, I G report is coming out tomorrow.
We'll go have full complete analysis coverage. I think we've
got at least a dozen people that are are literally
working on your behalf so that we can tear this
four document apart, and by the time we get on

(01:47):
the air we should be pretty prepared to tomorrow. We'll
have a preview of all that there is a war
that is breaking out now and it's you can't be contained.
We'll get to that between the d o J and
those members of Congress that are trying to do congressional
oversight and Rod Rosenstein is literally freaking out, flipping out

(02:09):
and and turning now on the very people that are
just trying to do their job. Will get to that. Uh,
we're gonna get to the eighteen all important mid term elections.
We have more fallout from the summit here in Singapore. Oh,
in California wants to break into three. It's gonna be
on a ballot measure that takes place out in called California.

(02:29):
I love these referendums and referendum states. So you'll have
northern California, you'll have Southern California, and then you'll have
the rest of California. UM, so that's gonna be interesting.
I would not be shocked at any point to see
some part of California wanting to see get out of
the we're done with the United States. I could just

(02:49):
see it happening. UM, and that would be three California states.
You'd break the state into three. And we'll explain all
of that what it means. Let me just preview a
little bit of what we expect with the i G
Report tomorrow. Sarah Carter, Doug Shown, they'll be here today
and we'll be discussing against Sarah Carter, David Shown will

(03:10):
be here. New king Ridge will also be joining us.
We'll have the more fallout, you know, the presidents and
that he said, Um, our country's biggest enemy is the
fake news. That's exactly when New king Rich breaks his
book into two parts. The second part of the book
of the challenges that the president faces, and challenge number
one is dealing with fake news every day. Um. But

(03:33):
that's after the first part, which goes through all the
amazing accomplishments that the media, of course never wants to
give him any credit for because that makes them look
bad because they've been basically creating a caricature and an
image of Donald Trump that's never been accurate, never been fair,
never been true, and they it doesn't fit their agenda.
So as they advanced this false narrative, caricature agenda. UM,

(03:58):
and every time Donald Trump is something that actually works,
it makes them look stupid, and they don't want to
have to admit they're stupid. What's the hardest thing for
the human ego to ever do it's admit wrong, say
you're sorry. It's the hardest thing to do in life.

(04:19):
Linda's laugh Why are you laughing? Linda has a new
nickname here in Singapore is called the Force of Nature.
I thought that was my name in America. I just
brought it with me. No, well, well, I thought it
was my name. Where are we a gon? What? What?
What country? Are we in Singapore? We're in Singapore. Listen,
they get a kick out of my access. Oh I've noticed. Oh,
they get a kick out of it. But the problem is,

(04:41):
you want any time you walk into a room, it's
like hurricane Linda comes flying in. Is it a tornado
or a hurricane depends? It seems more sustained. Sometimes tornadoes
just touchdown and go this. This is a hurricane that
kind of stays in one place and every d exactly.

(05:01):
That's actually a pretty good analysis, all right. So the
IG report comes out tomorrow, and now remember there, this
has been eighteen months in the making. The i G
Report the Inspector General of the Department of Justice. It
is supposed to be independent, it's supposed to be separate,
it's supposed to be apart from the Department of Justice

(05:25):
and Michael Harritt Harowitz was tasked with the job of
looking into the handling of Clinton's email server scandal and
how it all led to the decision to exonerate her
even though every single person knows there are crimes committed.

(05:45):
And this, I guess is the challenge he's had, what
five people working all of this time. Now it's been
three weeks the Department of Justice has had the document,
and in that period of time they have been lobbying
behind the scenes to try and get Michael Harrowitz to
make changes to the document, to put in redactions to

(06:06):
the document, to add their own commentary to the document,
which they have according to i G Rules, regulations, laws,
they have the ability to do. Um. Are we ever
gonna get the original document and have an opportunity to
see what what the Department of Justice would be able
to have persuaded Michael Horowitz to shift or alter or

(06:30):
change or redact. Well, that's a pretty big question. Um.
The problem here is for Michael Harrowitz is there is
no ambiguity about what happened. We don't have any doubt
what happened. And if you don't believe me, we could
we could go back and just start playing the July
five press conference, and we're told that insubordination, that word

(06:54):
is going to be used about James Comey. When James
Comey circumvents Loretta Lynch, who was compromised because she met
just before the decision is being made with Bill Clinton.
Remember if this was an investigation into his wife on
the tarmac in Arizona for somewhat forty five minutes. They
claimed they were talking about their grandkids for forty five minutes,

(07:16):
and nobody believed it, and they tried to hide it.
So then she says, well, I'll just go along whatever
the recommendation of the FBI ars and and we'll go
with them. But it's still her call. She doesn't get
to it could have easily have been handed off to
one of her deputies. Well, that didn't happen, and James
call me, decided to take it upon himself. And we

(07:37):
all know that James called me in his own way,
like Peter Struck and Lisa Page are very anti Trump,
So in that sense, it's compromised. But here's what we know,
and this is gonna be interesting if if the i
G is gonna tell the truth, it is not in dispute.
In other words, nobody is saying this never happened that

(08:00):
Hillary Clinton, because it's factual, it's it's incontrovertible, it's not
something to debate. Hillary Clinton made a decision against State
Department rules regulations to set up a private email server
it Platt's River Network, a mom and pop shop server

(08:22):
company that put the server in a bathroom closet. Then
now she did it for obvious reasons, because if it
was done the traditional way, if it was she was
following protocol, because she even had sent out at one
point a letter to those that work in the State Department,
you can you cannot, you cannot bring the classified top

(08:46):
secret information off site. I mean, the idea is, you
want to protect American secrets, you want to protect we
We've got to have intelligence protected in this country. And
it didn't happen in this case. And then she went
through the long, arduous, painful Clinton ask parsing of words. Well,

(09:08):
they weren't marked classified at the time, they weren't marked
top secret at the time. UH, special Access programming information
that is the highest level of secrets our government has.
And it turns out that in spite of her claims
that such information never made it to that server in

(09:30):
that bathroom closet, in fact it did. It's not in dispute,
and her claims that in fact she never had classified
information were all proven false. Her claims there was no
top secret information that was proven false. The claim that
that special access programming information was not on it, that

(09:53):
too was proven false. And she said, well, it wasn't
marked at the time, Bologny, It was marked at the time.
Now we have laws. We've identified seventeen of them. I
won't go through them all again, but but most of
them predicated on the Espionage Act eighteen Usc. Seven ninety three,
the Espionage Act, the Espionage Act. It is a crime

(10:17):
to mishandle classified information. That is a felony. Now, if
you don't think it's real, will tell that to Christian Saucier.
He's the one that we advocated for in his program,
and we put his family on in his program. And
he spent a year in jail, away from his mother,

(10:38):
away from his wife, away from his his young daughter
because he took six pictures in a submarine. That was
the act under which he was prosecuted. Similarly, all of
this information Congress began to subpoena. As soon as the
information was subpoenaed, Hillary Clinton made the decision in our team,

(11:01):
we're gonna delete thirty three thousand emails because they're personal,
because they're about yoga, and they're about a wedding of
Chelsea there, about the funeral of a mother. Uh and
emails to Bill Clinton, my husband, personal emails. One problem
there of that that argument is a lie. Right off

(11:23):
the topic is Bill Clinton doesn't email. He has no email.
There were no emails with Bill Clinton. And the idea
that you could have thirty three thousand emails about yoga,
a wedding, and a funeral just doesn't meet the smell test.
I don't care how big the wedding is and how
elaborate the funeral plans happen to be. So after their subpoena,

(11:46):
Hillary Clinton decides to delete them. And then a new
word entered the American lexicon, and that is bleach pit.
I don't think anybody listening to this program today. And
Buddy had heard a bleach bit before Hillary Clinton because
after she deleted the subpoena emails, well, her and her

(12:09):
team thinking that they'd be ever so clever. Well, they
decided to acid wash the hard drive with a product
that is called bleach bit, and after she used bleach bit,
the idea was everything was white clean ed. Henry infamously
now asked her, did you did you wipe the server clean?
And her answer, you mean like ed with a cloth?

(12:31):
You say, you I'm not you know, I don't. I
have no idea. That's why we turned it over. We
were in charge of it. You were the official in charge.
Did you wipe the server but like with a cloth
or somebody? No? Well, no, digitally did try? I don't
know how it works digitally at all, like with a
cloth or something that I that I wiped the server? Okay,
who's ever seen a server? I don't know what a

(12:53):
server looks like. You mean that I go in and
dust it with pledge? I mean, what are you talking about? No,
she she was trying to acid washed the hard drive,
and then she had the issue with the devices, and
the devices were blackberries and and other handheld devices because
the emails that were on the server that shouldn't have
been there in the classified, top secret Special Access Program information.

(13:16):
We're all sent to the blackberries from the server. So
if you're gonna acid washed the hard drive, you better
get rid of all the other evidence too, all of
which is a crime. Having this having that information there
violates the Espionage Act, mishandling classified information as a felony,
destroying classified top secret special access programming information as a felony.

(13:39):
And it's not in dispute. So now that should be
the predicate of everything Michael Horowitz tells us tomorrow, and
the cynical part of me that has no faith in
inequal justice under the law any longer, I think she
gets away with it. And the idea that when I

(14:01):
last week suggested after Robert Mueller said, oh, if you
have a phone and I'm investigating you, I want you
to turn your phone over. And I said if if
I didn't say if, I said to people that were
told to turn over their phone to do exactly what
Hillary Clinton did and acid washed the hard drive and
and delete the emails and break their devices into etsy

(14:23):
bitsy pieces. By the way, bad advice, I said, uh
ha ha, kidding, not gonna work out for you. Well,
very well, then the left, you know, they're more concerned
than I said it, rather than the fact that she
did it, which I wasn't even saying because I said if,
and I would never recommend people break the law anyway.
So these are all incontrovertible issues. The evidence is not

(14:45):
in dispute. Now what is What is the Inspector General
gonna do? Because if it's five pages, there's plenty of
room to lay out everything that I just said happened here.
Because the X phase of this is why Hillary Clinton
wasn't treated like Christian Saucier. And I'll explain that on

(15:07):
the other side of the break card. We'll take a break,
we'll come back. We're in Singapore. We'll get a preview
of this i G report. Also the intramural fighting with
the d o J and members of Congress that are
trying to do their job of oversight. David Show and
Sarah Carter new Gamebridge is going to weigh in on
all of this. We'll have more fall out from the
summit here in Singapore. With only a kite, a house key,

(15:30):
and wet hempstring, Benjamin Franklin captured lightning in a bottle
over two d and sixty years later, with a little resourcefulness, ingenuity,
and grit, we're not only capturing energy from the sun
and wind. We're starring it, ensuring Americans have the energy
they need whenever they need it. Learn more about the

(15:51):
nation's leader and energy storage at next Era energy dot Com.
All Right, as we continue, we're in Singapore radial with
us i G report out tomorrow. So I want to
just reiterate a very important point here, and that is
that the evidence that Hillary committed crimes is not in dispute. Now.

(16:15):
The i G should set that that foundation when they
come out with their report tomorrow. If they ignore it,
they're not doing the American people of service, because the
American people aren't gonna come, you know, be able to
cite eighteen USC sn espionage Jacques. They're not gonna know

(16:35):
what it means. I bet you most people don't even
understand what special Access programming information is about, or I
think they understand classified top secret. And the lying of
the Clinton's probably obfuse skated, well, it wasn't marked at
the time. We well that was a line too. Now.
The issue we'll get to this when we get back
in our preview is did they rigged the investigation? The

(16:59):
short and there is next the details. The short answer
is absolutely yes. The details are coming up next Finally,
with respect to our recommendation to the Department of Justice.
In our system, the prosecutors make the decisions about whether
charges are appropriate based on evidence that the FBI helps collect.
Although we don't normally make public our recommendations to the prosecutors,

(17:21):
we frequently make recommendations and engage in productive conversations with
prosecutors about what resolution may be appropriate given the evidence.
In this case, given the importance of the matter, I
think unusual transparency is in order. Although there is evidence
of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of
classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would

(17:44):
bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily a way a number
of factors before deciding whether to bring charges. They're obvious
considerations like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent.
Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person's actions
and how similar situation sations have been handled in the past.
In looking back at our investigations into the mishandling or

(18:05):
removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that
would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the
cases prosecuted involved some combination of clearly intentional and willful
mishandling of classified information, or vast quantities of information exposed
in such a way as to support an inference of

(18:26):
intentional misconduct, or indications of disloyalty to the United States,
or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those
things here, all right. That was James Comey on the
fifth of July usurping the power of the Attorney General
and making his big announcement. That was after a thirteen

(18:48):
and a half minute lead up of him laying out
the case of every single crime Hillary committed. Well, intent,
how can you argue that she didn't purposefully put the
email server where she put it by design? It It
evades all sense of logic. Oh, well, the intended, the context,

(19:11):
and we're looking at other cases. Nobody. In the original
draft of James Coomey and Peter Struck, they talked about
six foreign intelligence agencies hacking into that mom and pop
shop server. You want to know whether Clinton emails came
from just putting names in a hat, and maybe pick

(19:34):
one because you have your chance. It would be at
least one in six, you know, like North Korea, Iran, Russia, China.
Who knows whoever else might have gotten access to that
server because the foreign intelligence they all knew that was
her private email server, all of them, and they all
got ahold of it. That's why these emails they're out

(19:55):
there floating around somewhere. I know the FBI has been
able to get some of them back. And this is
now what the i G has to investigate. How did
we get to that conversation? Now, they only interviewed Hillary
Clinton two or three days before, and she was allowed
to have her lawyers in the room, people themselves that
were implicated in all this with their computers, which is

(20:18):
highly inappropriate. The other issue, why was this case taken
away from field agents and brought to what is known
as the seventh floor? In other words, where Andrew McCabe
and Jim Comey and Bruce or you know, and and
all of these people that we have now discovered are

(20:38):
involved in a in a series of issues here in
terms of abusive power, etcetera. And this is where the
i G now is going to have to make a decision.
You know, you can't find the case, Well, let's just
stay with one Christian sauci a six pictures on a submarine.
He's working in the Navy and he's proud of where
he works, and those pictures he put on his phone,

(20:59):
never put on social media, never, never shared with anybody else,
and he got a year in jail. The information Hillary
Clinton had was far worse because, yeah, in that same
press conference, Jim Comey goes through a list of yeah, classified,
top secret, special access programming information. And remember the original

(21:21):
draft net reckless disregard, you know, reckless handling of of information,
and they watered it down because that would have met
the legal standard. And in the same exact case, you know,
Hillary Clinton, it's oh, they weren't more classified at the time,
He pointed out, Yeah, they were. They were more classified
at the time, and some were more classified. Ever, but

(21:42):
her claims were not true. And if you're not gonna
say this willful intention when somebody deletes subpoena emails, acid
washes the hard drive introduces new words to the American lexicon,
bleach bit. I wish I had known ahead of time.
He could have well invested in bleach bid. You know
now that it is, I guess the most well known.

(22:05):
If you're an acid hard drive washer out there and
you wanna know, it's just obscene, which is why it
was so effective last week when I said, well, if
Robert Mueller is asking for your your cell phones and
your personal devices, if he's asking for it, well you
can do what Hillary did. If I advise people to
do that, it would it wouldn't work out well for you.

(22:27):
It wouldn't nothing good would come of it. You would
not get the same treatment that Hillary got. And all
of this comes down to very fundamental principles as a
society as it relates to the rule of law. Do
we have a dual justice system? Do we have one
system of justice for Hillary, one system of justice for

(22:48):
her aids, one system of justice for Christian Saucier, one
system of justice for the rest of us. What happened
equal application under the law? What happened to equal justice
under the law? What happened to the idea that you're
not treated differently just because of what your last name
happens to be. You know, look, this has happened throughout history.

(23:10):
Think of Think of the chap Aquitic case, which comes
to mind. You know, Ted Kennedy out late at night,
Mary Joe CAPECTI drives off a bridge into the water.
He rescues himself. There is a woman and you know
forensics that had taken place over there show she was
alive for quite a long period of time because there

(23:31):
was a there was a air bubble within the car.
It didn't flood with all water immediately. It took a
lot of time. He gets out of the water, says
he tried, tried, tried again to find her. But he
gets out of chap Aquittic Bay or whatever they call it.
And there is a home right across from where this

(23:51):
car went in the water. The home had its light on,
and he didn't go to the home. He went home.
He went to wherever he was stay and didn't show
up until the next morning, telling nobody but his political
operative friends. Nobody went to save the woman's life, and
of course Ted Kennedy got a slap on the wrist.
Do you think that would happen to anybody else. I

(24:12):
don't think so. You have a responsibility to try and
save somebody's life here, especially he was driving the car.
So the IG report now is it's it's done, What
changes have been made, what suggested changes were put forward.
The difficulty in the problem of any I G is,
you know, do you allow them to investigate themselves? Do

(24:33):
you allow the department. This is a Department of Justice
inspector general. Now you can argue right off the top that, well,
he was pretty tough on Andrew McCabe. Andrew McCabe and lied. Okay,
now he's got a criminal referral. Does James Comey and
Peter Struck who put this together and started writing the
exoneration in May before the investigation had taken place? Does

(24:54):
that not show intent that they wanted Hillary Clinton to
get off and the fact that they waited until July
to interview Hillary and seventeen other key witnesses and three
days later they were all done, finished whitewash. Okay, she
remains the candidate. Peter Struck who's saying, God, we can't
have Donald Trump as president ever. We need an insurance policy.

(25:16):
God forbidd He's not gonna win, but God Forbiddy wins.
It's like having a heart attack and dying when you're forty.
We need an insurance policy, as we talked about with
Andrew McCabe. So it's gonna be interesting. I I do
not I don't have the confidence. I'm not gonna lie.
I think it's gonna use some tough words, tough language.
We'll see if there's not criminal referrals here. At the

(25:39):
end of the day, I would say that they're giving
others a pass that most of us would never get, um,
you know, and that brings us to all the other investigation.
You know, people keep saying on the left, well, why
does Hannity mentioned Hillary Clinton? Because it all matters, because

(26:00):
it's the entire justice system. It's because if we're applying
laws in one case and not another case, then we
don't have equal justice under the law. We're no longer
really a constitutional republic. And and that's why it's so
key and so important. For example, look at the Russia investigation.
The very people that are involved in rigging, as far

(26:24):
as I'm concerned, the investigation into Hillary are also the
very people that have been pushing and pushing and pushing
this Trump Russia collusion narrative. Now you can look at
all of the indictment, she's well, well, there's five people,
some played guilty. They didn't plead guilty to anything involving
Trump campaign Russia collusion at all. You know, Michael Flynn

(26:48):
lying to the fbich had nothing to do about conversations
with as soon to be counterpart, and when he that
they had illegally surveiled and he didn't give the exact
answer when they questioned him, so therefore they said he's
lying to the FBI or in the case of Paul Manafort, well,
I think Judge Ellis the third got that right. If

(27:10):
they're looking at tax fraud issues back to two thousand
and five through two thousand and seven that have to
do with work that he did for the Ukraine and
not Russia, and whether or not money was funneled, or
whether or not there's a tax fraud of some kind
that has nothing to do with Russia, It has nothing
to do with the campaign. It has to do with

(27:32):
Paul Manafort. But I think, as Judge Ellis said, I
think they brought that case back up for one reason
to put the screws to Manifort, to make him sing.
Although he may compose. Because when somebody's facing a lot
of years in jail and you say, well, if you
give up this person, we'll just make it six months
probation or house arrest. Thirty years in jail, six months

(27:57):
house probation, What do you want me to say? What
are you looking for? That happens all the time, And
by the way, that should not happen. You cannot incentivize
somebody literally holding out freedom to somebody that's facing jail
time and anticipate and expect that they're gonna tell the

(28:18):
truth on all occasions. And it's a it's a flawed
part of our criminal justice system. So Judge Ellis says,
they're gonna put the screws to him, and they're gonna
try and make him sing or he's gonna compose. And
the whole purpose is to get information so that they
could use to prosecute or impeach Donald Trump. And that's
why this is all happening. Alright, So back to my point,

(28:40):
back to where we are here. You know, look at
the fight that is going on with the you know,
we we have all these congressional committees. We have Good
Lats Committee, Gouty's Committee, we have Devin Newness House Intel Committee.
And apparently back in January, the Deputy Attorney General, who
I've been told by numerous people has a vicious, horrible,
angry temper, threatened the subpoena the emails, phone records, other

(29:06):
documents from lawmakers and staff of the Republican House led
committee during a tense exchange earlier this week. So he's
going to use the Department of Justice subpoena powers to
basically intimidate members that are are tasked constitutionally with doing
oversight and looking into any potential corruption that might have

(29:26):
taken place at the Department of Justice. It is outrageous,
it is And this is only just getting known that
he criticized the committee for sending our requests and writing
and further critical that the committee's requests to have the
d o J FBI do the same when responding, etcetera, etcetera,
going as far as to say that if the Committee
likes being litigators, then we the d o J. We

(29:48):
two our litigators litigators, and guess what will subpoena your records?
Will subpoena your emails? Referring to the House Government Reform
and I'm sorry, the House Intel Committee, the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence and Congress overall. Well, okay, that's basically
saying we're going to use our power to stop you
from doing what is constitutionally your job, and that is

(30:13):
in a system of checks and balances and coequal branches
of government to find out if there is corruption that
has been taken place. Remember, Rod Rosenstein is the guy
that never wanted a hand over what became the new
Nez memo that described all the FISA abuse and the
line that went on to four separate FISA judges. And

(30:33):
it was Rod Rosenstein that signed the fourth FISA warrant
against Carter Page, Trump campaign associate. And he was also
the guy that wrote the letter recommending the firing of Comey.
So it's the same Rod Rosenstein that has no business
being the person that picks Robert Mueller to be the
special prosecutor to investigate Trump on Trump Russia collusion. And

(30:54):
if we're speaking of collusion of any kind, well we
do know there was collusion in this sense. Was that
Hillary Clinton, her campaign and the d n C and
the finances that she controlled, funneled money to a law
firm Perkins Cooie for the purpose of hiring a OP
research firm, uh which we know Fusion GPS, which then

(31:16):
hires a foreign national. I thought that was bad. Christopher Steele,
Christopher Steele uses Russian and Russian government sources to create
a dossier. And the dossier, according to his own words
and interrogatories, as he's facing the possibility of perjury, said well,
it's probably, you know, fifty fifty. I never this is

(31:38):
just raw intelligence that fifty fifty became the basis of
advisor warrant to spy on an American citizen that happened
to be a member of the opposition party campaign during
a presidential election. Anyway, we'll have the latest on this,
David Shown and Sarah Carter as we continue from Singapore.

(31:58):
One Shawn is our number. New Game Ridge is going
to check in with us today. Daniel Hoffman on the
fallout from North Korea in the summit. Al right, news
round up, information overloads. As we continue from Singapore today
five am Local time, five o'clock Eastern time, PM Eastern
and in d C, New York, and of course two
o'clock Pacific nine. One Shawn is on number. We're gonna

(32:21):
have my interview with the President coming at the bottom
of this half hour, but we do continue a lot
of news being made and fallout from the summit here
in Singapore. Kim Jong Un, now, according to the UK Independent,
has now accepted Donald Trump's invitation to visit the United States.
North Korea media is also reporting that and what could
be further evidence of his commitment to engage in the

(32:43):
peace process. I do agree with News said, the more
they see the United States, the more they're gonna like it.
And you know, the more they see places like Singapore
right here in their region of the world, A vibrant city, um,
as beautiful as any you've been to. You know, tall buildings.
I mean, we'll throw a PI tris up for you
if your interest, or just go online and take a look.
It is a clean, vibrant um city with prosperity and

(33:08):
a lot of people doing well. Not exactly my former government,
but certainly a lot better than what they have with
thirty five dollars a month the average amount of money
that is earned in North Korea, not exactly living high
on the hug um. I want to just make a
comparison here. You know, the president saying he wants to
d nuke the entire Korean peninsula. Um. And then you've

(33:31):
got the media coverage of all of this. You know,
their focus is on the menu and ripping the menu
from the Kim Jong un lunch. I guess we should
have served caviat and champaigne. Not what what what do
you what is the proper menu? Maybe they requested certain
things maybe we did offer them other options here, or

(33:53):
the media criticizing. You know, the summit just goes on
and on. In spite of all of the things that
happened before the summit that incentivized this country, meaning the
United States, our country. You know that this is a
good thing to do. We can make progress. We don't
have missiles being fired over Japan. We have hostages that

(34:15):
are now home. We have a nuclear test site that
has been dismantled crossing of the d m Z, and
I promise to to look at and and negotiate through
the d nuclearization of the entire peninsula. Let's play it
the start day. Let's just I think most people like
me want to know what was going on in that

(34:35):
room one on one. Well, the big thing is, this
is now my twenty fifth hour of being up in negotiating,
and we've been negotiating very hard. This is about the complete, verifiable,
irreversible de nuclearization of the entire peninsula. So without that
we could not have had a deal. I mean, do
one thing up. We want to d new the entire peninsula.

(34:59):
We want a d new that whole situation that a
summit is not an accomplishment for the American President. Brian Uh,
it is a major accomplishment for Kim jongoon, and in fact,
the spectacle of seeing the American flags along with the
DPRK flags as the bat shop for that handshake is
really jarring actually to to see, to witness. In fact,
I would say it's somewhat disgusting. It is actually a

(35:21):
debasement of the American flag. This is a despotic regime
that murders its own citizens, and so we're putting him
on the same stage as the American President. I don't
think we should discount the idea. It's not a coincidence
that this is precisely what putin desires. He places an
over emphasis on personal chemistry and not realizing that countries
have interests, they represent their interests. He Kim Jong n

(35:43):
did a very good job of representing the interests of
his nation and his own personal interests, and he snookered
Donald Tump. It may be okay in the real estate business,
but it's odious and disgusting when he was fawning over
one of the most vicious dictators on the planet. You
look at the polls. Uh, It's really interesting because where
we're talking about North Korea. Um, you know, the like
the last we're talking about Russia, right, the last we're

(36:05):
talking about issues at home? Yeah, well, why would we
not spend another year and a half talking about Russia
with no evidence ever in the year and a half? Yeah, well,
why why would it matter? If we're talking about a
regime that was firing missiles six months ago over Japan
and threatening the entire region and threatening to marry their

(36:29):
nuclear weapons to intercontinental ballistic weapons that could meet the
continental United States or reach the continental United States? Why
talk about that when we can spend another you know,
twenty four hours a day were weeks on end talking
to Michael Alvanati and about Stormy Daniels. I mean, why
would we ever do that? I mean, the our priorities

(36:52):
are skewed. Why would I spend twenty two hours in
the air and come to Singapore when I could have
stayed home and talk talked about Mueller and phony Russia
investigations and and of course Stormy Daniels. Anyway, you can't
even begin to make this stuff up. Joining us now, uh,
And we're glad to have him. He's been here the

(37:13):
entire time with us. Daniel Hoppin Fox News contributor. By
the way, thirty plus years CIA operations officer, and you
know a lot about this region of the world. One
of your closest friends in the CIA actually was brought
in to consult on this particular case. Right, Yeah, that's right,
that's Andrew Kim. You know, one of the one of
the really important steps that Secretary of Pompeo made when

(37:36):
shortly after he was sworn in as Director of CIA,
he created the Korean Mission Center so that we would
focus exclusively on on the Korean Peninsula the challenge we faced.
And then he brought back a recently retired senior Clandestine
Services officer, Andy Kim to run it. And he's a
native Korean speaker, he served in the region. He's, in
my view, are best subject matter expert on the agent.

(38:00):
But I do want to just quickly comment on your
last point about the hypocrisy and the media. It was
just a little while ago when during his campaign, uh
then candidate Obama suggested meeting with dictators from Iran and
from North Korea without preconditions, and that was applauded, And
you know, I just don't want to just don't get

(38:21):
that hypocrisy. You know a lot of people and I'm
just gonna be I said it during the Obama years
when you have somebody that apologizes for America, and somebody,
I mean Sarah Carter was the one that broke the
story about the rules of engagement that Obama had put
on our brave men and women in the military, which

(38:44):
literally is basically putting handcuffs on them and their ability
to defend themselves. We we send them to fight, risk
their lives, risk losing their limbs, and many of them
have and then we tell them, but you can't fire
unless you're a sense sure. Now, that type of rule
of engagement results in people dying because you cannot second

(39:08):
guess those people that are on the battlefield. And the
fact that we did do that is a form of
insanity to me. And I said at the time, I
would not want anybody that I loved and cared about
serving under that commander in chief because he's weak and
the same thing we we saw how weak he was
with the molos of around. I wouldn't want him negotiating
with Kim Jong un because he'd probably be doing the

(39:29):
same thing Clinton did, or the same thing he did
with the molos bribing them and kissing their ring and saying, well,
if I give you billions of dollars, you promised to
be nice. And it's a mentality I don't understand, and
the idea that you'd have a different philosophy under a
different president that has this the same same approach to
foreign policy as say Reagan, which is trust but verifying

(39:53):
piece through strength. It's not hypocritical, it's not inconsistent. It's
called you know what, it's called using common sense judgment
based on the current reality or the situation of who's
the commander in chief. I have I do have one
standard for Obama and I have another standard for Trump,

(40:13):
because I trust the Trump is gonna be strong with
these guys and be willing to walk away any second. Yeah.
I just don't understand how when the on the one hand,
for the for the folks criticizing President Trump, they were
applauding President Obama for for suggesting what even wasn't as
effective as what President Trump is doing. And to a
point about your rules of engagement, I witnessed that firsthand

(40:33):
we were hamstrung by um just odious rules of engagement
that were overly bureaucratic and absolutely impacted our ability to
take the fight to the enemy and defend ourselves. I mean,
then we saw what happened. I mean, I don't know
if you know the case of Clint Laurance. I mean,
the guy's got what twenty deers in jail and he
became a platoon commander. And because he didn't quote follow

(40:56):
every specific rule of engagement. I'd like to see the
President important him at some point, sooner rather than later.
So you know the region, you see what happened, you
see the media's coverage of it. And now Kim Jong
un wants to come to the United States. How should
we interpret that. You've been one that has been very
serious about the idea. You got to manage expectations. We

(41:17):
know what he did before the president got here in Singapore,
how do you read that? So a couple of points
about that. First of all, we are deeply diplomatically engaged
with North Korea right now. Tension is down. So those
were criticizing the president for his rhetoric in the past
and now criticizing him for current steps to bring diplomacy
to the fold. I just again, that's inconsistent. I'm not

(41:38):
quite sure, I understand that, but I would also highlight
for historians. Uh, we all remember the Reagan years and
the multiple summits with Mikhail Gorbachov. It took two or
three summits before we actually got to where we needed in.
The more contact we have, we build muscle memory inside
that Hermit Kingdom North Korea bureaucracy, where the guys on

(41:59):
Kim Jong team get used to traveling and meeting our
folks and talking about areas of common concern. I think
that's all a very good thing for us. Uh. There's
no question that there will be a lot of steps
that that will have to get through before that White
House visit. But the discussion already I think is very positive.
Here's one of the big questions, and your years as
an intelligence officer with the cia UM, I think you

(42:22):
know better than anybody. Do the Chinese want this to happen?
After all, this is their region of the world. They
have the greater amount of influence of North Korea, or
that they want instability in the region because maybe their
territorial ambitions, right, So the first thing they want is stability.
They're very concerned about an unstable North Korea, the potential

(42:45):
for a real crisis if that regime imploded. But they're
also concerned about US influence in the region. They'd like
to get our troops out. They would prefer that we
not conduct military exercises. Those are okay, those are points
of leverage for us that we can use against the
China needs. For sure. Uh, they don't have our best
interests at heart. We know that. But this president, this

(43:05):
administration can I think that. I think there's a different
way to look at it. The Chinese are out for
the Chinese. Chinese president is looking out for his country,
and really almost for the first time, we got an
American president saying I'm looking out for America first. And
that's why, for example, the negotiation on trade deals are
so important. Um and so I mean in that sense,

(43:27):
he can't fault them. The question is to the Chinese,
do they want peace, that they want to a safer
world than a better society? I think they do. I
think the question that I'd be asking our intelligence community
is does China. Is China prepared to go as far
as they need to go to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula
or would they prefer that North Korea maybe look a

(43:48):
little bit more like China, where they open up economically,
retain political control and repression over their own citizens, reduced
their nuclear profile, reduced that maybe stop the testing um,
stop the testing of the I C b ms and
and bring some stability to the region. That might be
where China is headed, and that might be where we
have more discussion with them. All right, Daniel Hoffman is

(44:10):
with us thirty plus years in the CIA is an
operative eight nine POT one. Shawn is our number. We'll
come back a little more with him. My interview with
President Trump coming up, and as we continue our final moments.
Daniel Hoffman, CIA operative. You know, uh, I told everybody
and we were discussing it the other day. When you
stop buying, how you literally scare the crap out of

(44:31):
everybody when you sit and we you know, we've had
lunches and dinners together, and everybody's like, oh, all of
this is happening, and most people don't know meaning spying.
It's that bad. Yeah, I mean under the surface, there's
a lot going on in Singapore. And you talked about Singapore.
It's the prototype for this economically vibrant region where North
Korea is the outlier. But uh, yeah, there's you know,

(44:51):
the Russians and the Chinese were not here officially, but
they were here with their espionage teams trying to collect
intelligence on what was going on at summit and on
those senior US officials and others who were involved. And
but the fact is the you said, it's a lot
more likely we'd get spied on in Singapore because you know,

(45:12):
obviously because of the events that were here. What about
in the United States, How vulnerable are people because you know,
if you look online and you read Apple, they say, well,
your iPhone is encrypted, and uh, it's safe, and the
FBI had a problem opening an iPhone. You don't think
that's a problem for foreign services. Well, let me start
with the human element. The Russians and the Chinese flood

(45:33):
the zone inside the United States. They have a tremendous
number of intelligence officers. You might remember the case of
the Russian illegals operating the United States. We arrested them
in two thousand ten and traded them for four guys
who were going to take their last breaths in Siberian
death camps who had been some of them, one of
them in particular, have been spying on our behalf Uh,
so they're out to collect intelligence from human sources, both

(45:56):
the Chinese and the Russians inside the United States. You
can be sure at this upcoming Why How summit that
they'll be mounting a full court press to collect intelligence
on the summit. And do we have the ability to
stop them? You know, I often wonder whether the FBI
has the resources to counter Russia China. But in that environment,
would not be a CIA operation within the United States

(46:16):
because it deals with foreign entities. No, it's actually an
FBI operation domestically, we would CIA will be collecting intelligence
on them, on them, but inside Russia and China and
other places. Know, there comes a point where you know,
you can't blame them. At some point, we've got to
defend ourselves. And if we don't do that, you know,
we really love no one else to blame. Daniel Hopper

(46:37):
will see on TV tonight Hannity from Singapore nine Eastern
don't miss it, will preview the IG report, latest fall
out from this summit and the battle that's going on.
Devin Nooness and others will be joining us tonight. Uh,
and we hope you'll join us. Quick break right back
my interview with the President is next, alright till the
top of the hour. A's well, let's see here, uh

(47:00):
six am here top of the hour, a m. In Singapore. Anyway, Um,
we're still in Singapore. We have to stay so we
can get the i G report to you tomorrow and
full and comprehensive coverage of all of that which we
will be bringing you on radio NTV. We will have
Hannity tonight Live nine Eastern on the Fox News channel.
And I had the interview in the opportunity to sit

(47:23):
down with the president after he had this historic meeting
with Kim Jong un. We now have an update. Kim
Jong un, according to North Korean press, has accepted the
President's invitation. He will be coming to the United States,
which is a good sign. And so I want to
play the interview that I had in the exact room
where they first sat down and met. And this is

(47:46):
me talking to the President right after this all took place.
Thank you very much. Historic day. Let's just I think
most people like me want to know what was going
on in that room one on one. Well, the big
thing is this is now my twenty fifth hour of
being up and negotiating, and we've been negotiating very hard.

(48:06):
This is about the complete, verifiable, irreversible de nuclearization of
the entire peninsula. So without that we could not have
had a deal. I mean, one thing, we want to
d nuke the entire peninsula. We want to d nuke
that whole situation. That is a hotbed. And you know

(48:26):
what's been happening for years and nobody did anything about it,
and you have to, we have no choice. We had to.
The relationship was really good. The you know it built
and I talked about early on in the relationship and
the feeling, well, we had a very good feel right
from the beginning, and we were able to get something
very important done. And actually something's happened after that was

(48:50):
sign shown where we're getting rid of certain missile research areas,
certain missile testing sites, and they're getting rid of a lot,
you know, in the lead up to this, and this
was pretty amazing because obviously I'm a pretty strong critic
of our news media in that country. But a lot
had happened. He had dismantled a nuclear test site, he

(49:11):
crossed over the d MZ, three hostages were released, the
missiles stopped being fired. He was willing you wouldn't have
come here if he did not, if he was not
willing to talk about d nuclearization. That's right. So all
of that happened before you walked in, And I don't
remember that you send cargo planes, a cash or gave
anything really before the lead up? Why do you think

(49:33):
you why do you think he's interested in doing this
after spending that time? But that it's sort of interesting
because I noticed some of the president. I'm not even
knocking him because honestly, they're treating me very good on
the subject. What's to treat badly? But some of the
press would say he's meeting with them, and therefore he
has a major loss. I said, since when, and you
know others wanted to it never worked out. It probably

(49:54):
never could have worked out. But we really have gotten
a lot. You haven't seen missiles going up in seven
or eight months, you haven't seen research, you haven't seen
nuclear tests. Very importantly, Japan is very happy because they
were being encircled. I mean, there was a period of
time when they were going right over the middle of
Japan and we got our hostages back. And you're right,

(50:15):
we didn't pay for that. But but I think I
don't say that in a braggadoshes way at all, because
he did such a smart thing, because that was such
a good a good thing to do. And I feel
so badly about Otto warm beer. That was the one thing.
And Otto did not die in Vain, I actually believe,
and I've gotten very friendly without those parents. They're incredible people,

(50:36):
devastated as they you know, as you would think great parents.
He was a great young man. But I think without Otto,
this whole thing wouldn't have happened, because it crystallized when
he came back in the condition. It crystallized so much
to so many people, maybe even to the other side, frankly,
but I think that Otto truly did not die in Vain.

(50:59):
I've known you for a lot of years, and I
think one trait that I could say is brutal honesty
in the room alone and then the subsequent talks with
your team and their team, how honest, how brutal, what
was said to try and bring people into the room.
So we got along very well. We got along from
the beginning. We started off, he and myself and two interpreters,

(51:23):
and from the beginning we got along. And you know,
I've made the statement and I've said it before. I've
said it about a lot of different kinds of relationships.
You can almost tell red at the beginning. There a
lot of people critics quickly saying, when you said a
little rocket man or fire and fury, or you know,

(51:44):
when he said, oh, I've got a red button on
my desk, he said, oh, mine's bigger and it works
better than yours. How did we how did it evolve
from that to this? Because he did say at the
very beginning, we're going to basically start all and what
that has been building behind the scenes. Well, I think
without the rhetoric, we wouldn't have been here. I really

(52:06):
believe that. You know, we did sanctions and all of
the things that you would do, but I think without
the rhetoric, you know, other administrations, I don't want to
get specific on that, but they had a policy of silence.
If they said something very bad, very threatening and horrible,
just don't answer. That's not the answer, that's not what
you have to do. So I think the rhetoric. I

(52:28):
hated to do it sometimes I felt foolish doing it,
but we had no choice. So strategically you were doing it. Well, yeah,
I mean, but and I think he gained respect. You know,
he's a strong guy. Hey, people were saying, what's he like.
He's got a very good personality. He's funny, and he's
very very smart. He's a great negotiator, and he's a

(52:50):
very strategic kind of a guy. One of the points
that I think surprised everybody. I think, um, every American
should be very happy about this is the Korean War
which has gone on for so long. More importantly, there
are still American remains there and they will be repatriated.
Remains are coming back, and we got that at the end.

(53:12):
In fact, we have some things that you don't even
have in the report. We put in a teleports, what
we signed, missile sites that they used for the launching
of missiles, and missile research areas that's going to be gone.
We made a lot of progress, tremendous amount of progress.
And one of the things that I'm very happy about,
We're not going to play the war games anymore, which

(53:32):
you know how expensive that is. We'll find these mess
of bombers in for practice from Guam. I said, how
far as Guam? Six and a half hours? So I said,
that's a long way for a big bomber. Times you know,
twenty and lots of other planes coming in. So we're
not going to be doing the war games as long
as we're negotiating in good faith. So that's good for

(53:53):
a number of reasons, in addition to which we save
a tremendous amount of money, you know those things. I
hate to sound like appear business man, but I kept saying,
what's this costing? I would look at them coming in
from the sea and bombs exploding every I said, what
does this cost? I don't even want to tell you,
but it's a lot. So we're not going to be
doing that as long as we're negotiating in good faith,

(54:15):
which I think we will be. You managed the expectations,
I think pretty well. You didn't think coming in here
you were going to sign an agreement, and you said
maybe it takes two, three, four or five meetings, but
you were open to going as faster as slow as
he wanted. We get along better than I would have
assumed right from the beginning. We gotta let more done
today than I ever thought possible. And he's going back.

(54:38):
He's now headed back, and he I think he's going
back to get this done. He wants to get it done.
You know, you hear the whole thing about his father
and other administrations or his grandfather. The fact is that
he and he brings that up, but they weren't dealing
with me. They were dealing with different people, would have
different Nobody's ever come close to talk about the difference

(54:58):
between past administration in yours. Yes, but I can't say
that because I don't want to be the one saying it.
At some point, I'm sure he'll say it. But they
never got it done and they were never the gloves either.
I mean, it was never to a point where they
were like we are. Is there is there a history
lesson to learn here? And I think in one sense
we could talk about past administrations. Reagan, evil Empire. Mr

(55:22):
gorbuschof tear down this wall. His own advisers did wanted
to take those words out of that speech. And you
compare Bill Clinton gave Kim Jong UN's father three billion
dollars in energy subsidimendous amount of money the mos in Iran.
You have said, the worst deal in the history of mankind.

(55:43):
That's the worst if I've ever seen worse than NAFTA,
and I think NAFTA is pretty bad, worse than the
w t O, the World Trade Organization, which frankly built
China in addition to the money that we gave them
all the time. You know, I mean, these were terrible deals,
but I would say that the Randal was one of
the worst I've ever said. I will say speaking of

(56:03):
the er Indial, since we got out of that deal,
and we could do it very easily because they never
had it approved by Congress, who was just must be
approved by Congress. I wanted to be approved by Congress
because otherwise it's really doesn't mean very much. I wanted
I would think anybody would want to approved by Congress.
But since we took out of that deals, we got
out of that deal, I think Iran is a much

(56:25):
different place. I don't think they're looking so much to
the Mediterranean and Syria and Yemen. Uh, they're starting to
pull people out of Yemen. They're starting to pull people
out of Syria. You know, it's a whole different thing. Now.
I did it for nuclear but one of the side
benefits is you take a look a serious look, and
Iran is not the country that it was three or

(56:45):
four months ago when they were much more embold and
will certainly sanctions played a big part part the strike
forces that you send into the regional and I think
at a certain point, honestly, I know the Iranian people,
I know many people from arond These are great people.
I really believe even at some point they're going to
come back and want to negotiate a deal. Did reutification
come up? Did humanitarian issues come up in the meeting? Yes?

(57:08):
It did. And one of the things I will tell
you that I'm most happy about, and that as you know,
is a big sticking point, is bringing back the remains
of thousands of soldiers that were killed. This came up
last minute. This wasn't this was sort of last minute. Yea,
I said, would it be possible? Because I get letters
all the time from families who lost a son and

(57:28):
lost a brother, lost father in Korea. That was a
rough fight and they were buried along the roadways. They
were buried as you know, soldiers going back and forth
into battle and they were burying them along roadways, and
they in please, please, could you do it? I get
so many letters from people who lost a loved one
in in North Korea, essentially in North Korea, and I

(57:50):
would say I'm going to try and I brought it up,
and I'll tell you what, it was almost immediate. Now
in the past there was you couldn't even talk about it.
It was really a nice response. How quickly, um, did
you talk about a trip to the United States? Did
you talk about I think at the right time, he'll
be absolutely be coming to the White House. Yeah. Look,

(58:14):
we've been very it's been a very intense relationship. It's
been short and very intense. And of course before that
it was pretty rhetorical. It was, you know, not a
pretty thing. People were very worried. But without that, I
don't think we would have been here today. He wants
to get something done. I want to get something done.
I think we'll get it done. And we started off
by really a very strong document. I think people are

(58:35):
surprised to see it. This shocked to see it. And
then add some more things that we got after that
was signed. And so can you give us maybe a
glimpse into what you keep sort of referring a little
bit to things that will be coming. So I just
think that we are now going to start the process
of the nuclearization of North Korea, and I believe that

(58:59):
he's going back can well started virtually immediately, and he's
already indicated that, and you look at what he's done.
So we got our hostages back, but they've blown up
one of their sites, one of their testing sites, their
primary testing site. In fact, some people say they're only
testing site. They're getting rid of a missile, which isn't
in the document that was done afterwards. They're getting rid

(59:19):
of a missile testing site. They're doing so much now.
So it's a process and it's it's really moving rapidly.
Last questions, I know you have a lot to do.
Um Obviously he wants something on his end, certainly wants
the the world community once sanctions lifted. He wants economic
opportunity and his people needed desperately or people starving there.

(59:40):
What he wants the security, and I understand that, and
he'll get that. And he wants to see if they
can make that incredible location because it's incredible. It's between
China and South kore Think of it. I'm in the
real estate business. Think of that is prosting personally, how
good a location is that you have China and you
have South Korea. He's got right in the middle of

(01:00:02):
both of them, surrounded by water, Okay, that's called like
there be anything better than that. And it's also beautiful land.
It's incredible land. I know you have a lot to do,
Mr President. Thank congratulations, appreciate it. All right. That was
the President right after his historic summit with Kim Jong
un and Kim Jong Un, according to North Korea media,

(01:00:23):
has now in fact accepted the President's invitation now to
go to the United States, and obviously this continues. The
President said it will be a process, and we got
a lot more out of this summit than anybody had anticipated,
and even the president themselves said, we don't expect us
to sign anything. They did, and it was more comprehensive

(01:00:44):
than anyone anticipated, in the President telling me in that
interview that, yeah, we even agreed to more. We just
couldn't get it into the document fast enough because they
at that point, we're on a time crunch, alright, Hannity,
tonight nine Eastern Fox News, we will give you a
preview of the i G report, the fallout from this summit,
and now the new news that the the chairman is

(01:01:06):
going to be visiting the US and much more. All Right,
that's gonna wrap things up for today, and let not
your heart be troubled, Hannity time. We're it's still in Singapore.
We want to be here for the i G Report.
In the twenty four hour flight time didn't allow for
me to get home and do radio and do television.
So we are gonna stay committed to on this busy newsweek,
to bringing you the best and most comprehensive news coverage

(01:01:29):
of everything. And we've got a whole team breaking this down.
We literally are assigning pages to individuals so that we'll
have all the information you need in Eastern We'll see
it tonight. Thanks for being with us. Back here tomorrow,