April 17, 2025 • 32 mins
John Solomon, Editor in Chief of Just the News - joins us to talk about the breaking news on NY AG Letitia James including allegations of mortgage fraud.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
We will come out to your city doing the way
I get tals, saying you a conscious son will be entire.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Telling.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
And if you want a little banging and YI ain't
come along.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
With the greatest economic power in the world if we're smart.
Speaker 4 (00:22):
If we're not smart, our.
Speaker 5 (00:25):
Country very badly.
Speaker 6 (00:26):
The fact that no one is questioning his mental acuity
or fitness to serve is beyond wild to me.
Speaker 7 (00:32):
Right This fear that some members of the media had
sometimes that they would be perceived as helping Trump if
they somehow diminished by right, that it was some sort
of zero some game.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
Freedom is back in style.
Speaker 5 (00:47):
Welcome to the revolution that will come in.
Speaker 4 (00:52):
To your city.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Going the way I get tals and saying you a
conscious son.
Speaker 8 (01:00):
The New Sean Hennity Show more I'm the Scenes, information
on freaking news.
Speaker 5 (01:06):
And more boned inspired solutions for America.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
Speaker 9 (01:15):
All Right, News round Up, Information Overload. Our toll free
number is eight hundred and nine four one Sean. If
you want to be a part of the program, We're
going to get into great specificity in detail.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
In a moment.
Speaker 9 (01:26):
We'll be joined by founder, creator investigative reporter Justinnews dot
com our friend John Solomon. But it appears that the
Trump administration now has issued a criminal referral for the
New York State Attorney General Leticia James, related to mortgage
(01:48):
fraud by making false statements on bank lending applications to
receive more favorable terms. Now that's kind of exactly what
Letitia James tried to prosecute President Trump for as part
of her law fair campaign to bankrupt the Trump organization
with a half billion dollar fine. You might recall in
(02:08):
the civil case in New York we had this outrageous fine.
You might recall that the judge in that case, his
name was in Goron, you know, used a valuation of
mar A Lago at eighteen million dollars. If anybody wants
to go to Zillow or realtor dot com or any
other real estate website, you will see that mar A
(02:29):
Lago is much closer to a billion, if not over
a billion dollars in value. And the judge wouldn't even
allow real estate experts from Palm Beach to testify in
this case. But anyway, the director of the Federal Housing
Finance Agency sent a criminal referral to the DOJ alleging
Miss James falsified documents and property records to obtain loans.
(02:50):
In one incident cited in the referral, James claims she
lived in Virginia to purchase a home in Norfolk while
serving as the New York Attorney General, where she is
required to reside for her job. In a separate incident,
she allegedly mis represented the description of a property that
she owns in Brooklyn, New York, to meet the requirements
(03:11):
for a government back loan, and based on media reports,
Latisia James has in multiple instances falsified bank documents and
property records to acquire government backed assistants and loans with
more favorable law terms. It was sent to the Attorney
General Pam Bondi and the Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche
(03:32):
and they said they will be reviewing it. By the way,
a twenty sixteen report revealed that Latisia James had committed
at that time This is The New York Observer November eighteen,
twenty sixteen finance fraud and the city's campaign finance boards
left her with a five seven hundred and five dollars
fine for various violations committed by her twenty thirteen campaign
(03:54):
to become the city's watchdog. And she had put in
claims for public funds during that election cycle, received one
and fifty three fifty eight dollars in public moneys, and
she was fined fifteen hundred dollars for failing to file
pre election disclosure statements and got hit with, you know,
a penalty at that time. She is not the only
(04:16):
elected official that has these issues. But just as a
matter of recall, remember it's Letsia James that said no
one's above the law. This is before Donald Trump's civil
fraud trial.
Speaker 6 (04:30):
My message is simple, no matter how powerful you are,
no matter how much money you think you may have, no.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
One is above the law.
Speaker 6 (04:39):
And it is my responsibility and my duty in my
job to enforce it. The law is both powerful and fragile.
And today in court we will prove our case. I
thank you all for being here and again justice will prevail.
Speaker 9 (04:54):
Now, justice didn't prevail as one of the greatest injustices.
John Solomon, Founder, editor in chief, investigative reporter Justinnews dot com.
Your reaction to all of this, John Solomon, Well.
Speaker 5 (05:06):
I agree with Letitia James that nobody's above the law,
and she may soon find that that is the case.
And as you pointed out, she did have this problem
a decade ago with campaign finances not complying with the law.
They're pretty egregious situation a decade ago, so there's already
a warning sign about her compliance with the law. If
you go out and you get a federally backed mortgage
or a mortgage regulated by the federal government, and you
(05:29):
don't comply with the law, you can face very serious consequences.
We know that because another prosecutor, another Democrat, in another
Blue state, just a year ago, the former Baltimore State's
Attorney went I was convicted in a very serious crime,
which are doing something very similar to what Letitia James
is now accused of. So this is serious stuff. Usually
(05:50):
mortgage fraud is a slam dunk case in the courts.
So if this moves forward, if the evidence that team
Federal Housing Finance Agency has provided to the Justice Department
checks out, if it's verified, and the FBICH goes confident
with it, the next step is likely a grand jury
investigation and the potential for an indictment of New York's
top law enforcement officials.
Speaker 9 (06:12):
Yeah, listen, there's other people that have had these allegations made.
One of them, if I'm not mistaken, is a guy
that I always often referred to as a congenital liar,
Adam Schiff. And if I'm not mistaken, didn't he get
one of those preempted pardons that in twenty twenty when
Trump was leaving office, said that it's outrageous and illegitimate
(06:37):
and should never be used. But yet Biden gave him
one out the door.
Speaker 5 (06:40):
Yeah, that's right. He did get one of the pampted
pardons in January, on January twentieth, as for conjunction to
his work with the January sixth Committee, he said he
didn't want it, he didn't need it, he disagreed with it,
but he took it. Now, there are two questions about
that part. One, is it as sweeping as has been
portrayed in the media. That will likely be tested in
the courts at some point. But two, if you're involved
(07:03):
in a mortgage matter, you can also be civilly sued.
A pardon doesn't protect you from civil liability. So there
are two routes in these mortgage cases where people can
get pursued. One of those is criminal, like what we
saw the referral yesterday referred to in other places, you
can be sued civilly for mortgage frauds, something that we
saw a lot of during the SNL scandal and other
prior scandal.
Speaker 9 (07:23):
By the way, wasn't that the civil trial in New
York against Donald Trump.
Speaker 5 (07:27):
There was a case of that exactly there. That shows
you the liability of Letitia James took the civil route
to create consequences for Donald Trump. So just the pardon
hasn't totally cleared any liability away from Adam Schiff yet.
And you know, Adam Schiff is remarkable. He's always on
his moral high horse. But you look over the years
(07:48):
how much he misled the American people under the color
of government, under the color of being an Intelligence committee
or a member of Congress. We now know that massive
things that he said at the time not true, and
he would have had to have known they were not
true because he was getting briefed on the Intelligence Committee
and the Gang of Eight and other Gang of Eight
members obviously wouldn't say what he said because they knew
(08:10):
it wasn't true. So the history of Adam Shipp precedes
this concern. We wrote about this last year. There's a
Senate ethics complaint pending against him on that matter. On
mortgage is something similar. He claimed multiple houses as his
primary residents. You're only allowed to take one, and it
has to be the one that you live in most
of the time. So that's another lawmaker that potentially is
(08:34):
going to come up in the conversation when it comes
to Letitia.
Speaker 9 (08:37):
James, let's talk about other information and documents that you
have been able to examine in great detail as it
relates to Operation Crossfire Hurricane. You have found some information
that I think is extremely enlightening. After James Comey was
fired four months into President Trump's administration, you add t
(09:00):
but like Rod Rosenstein and Andrew Weisman, I believe Correct
me if I'm wrong. Were they not talking about invoking
the twenty fifth Amendment and removing Donald Trump from office?
And correct me if I'm wrong. Wasn't everybody warned in
August of twenty twenty by Bruce or that the dirty
Russian disinformation Hillary Clinton bought and paid for Russian dossier
(09:23):
wasn't that? Didn't they say it was a political document
and it was not to be trusted, and didn't James
Comy move forward and get not one but four separate
Faiza Warrens. Didn't James Comy sign three of the four?
Didn't Rod Rosenstein sign one of those? What do you
make of these new documents?
Speaker 5 (09:44):
They're very confirming of the narrative that we so carefully
built with facts over the last eight years that the
Russia collusion story was never about evidence, was never about facts,
was never about wrongdoing by Donald Trump or any of
his things. It was about creating a political consequence to
keep Donald Trump from becoming the president or effectively executing
(10:06):
his plan as president. There are instances in these documents
where you see people acknowledging that they were considering wearing
a wire to capture the president or entrap the president
in a conversation, and they're doing that after the first
round of evidence falls apart, once they find out the
Christopher Steel dossier is garbage. That's the word I think
(10:27):
Bob Woodward wants to use for it. Once they found
out that the evidence against Mike Flynn wasn't true, there
was no basis to pursue Mike Flinn. Once they had
captured Carter Page and George Papadopolos on intercept saying we
would never do those things. We're patriots, we wouldn't sell
out our country to Russia. When they couldn't get the
original allegation through, they just pivoted to try to create
new crimes to investigate great process crimes. This was never
(10:51):
about following the law or enforcing the law, having real
evidence that would back a criminal conspiracy. Remember, John Durham
has concluded there was no eviden to justify the opening
across by hurricane. But every time any notion of an
allegation fell apart, they just simply created a new allegation,
until finally it stopped because Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows
(11:13):
and Chuck Grassley and John Johnson and Sean Henny and
John Solomon, Sarah Carter got the facts out. At some
point the game was up. But these documents show it
was a get Trump operation and evidence did not matter.
Speaker 4 (11:27):
What else did you discover?
Speaker 9 (11:28):
You found a few other nuggets who were speaking late
at night this week, and you found a few other
nuggets that a lot of people haven't picked up on.
Speaker 5 (11:37):
Yeah, this is I think a really important one because,
as you have so eloquently helped people understand over the years,
the intelligence community, the deep state, the FBI bad actors
could not have carried out this scam on the American
people if they didn't have complicitest players in the news media.
The news media drove the hysteria, created the perception there
(11:58):
was something there when there was nothing there. Again, another
player in this drama that didn't care much about the facts.
They cared about the headlines and the clicks and the
possibility of knocking Donald Trump out of the presidency having
another water Gate. How many times did wear Watergate? This
wasn't even remotely close to the water and didn't have
any crime. But the Washington Post and the New York Times,
(12:18):
as we've reported, they won Pulitzers in twenty eighteen for
their reporting on this. We now have for the first
time direct proof from the FBI files that classified by
Donald Trump released by Cash Mattel that a story in
the Washington Post Pulitzer submission is wrong. They reported that
in a conversation, and this is one that was in
(12:39):
the Pulitzer package. So it's a Pulitzer winning article that
Donald Trump tried to pressure the NSA director. Obama's former
NSA director who carried over into the Trump administration to
say that there was no truth to the Russian hacking
or interference in the election. That's not what Donald Trump said.
In fact, when he was interviewed, the NSA director said
(13:01):
very clearly, the Washington Post story is wrong. And it's
not only wrong, based on my recollection, there was a
contemporaneous document that was written about the conversation that shows
exactly what was said and it's not what the Washington
Post reported. For the very first time, we know a
Politzer Prize top journalism award winning article in that compilation
(13:23):
is actually demonstrably false. Now you'll say, well, it's great
for history, but there's actually a current reason to be
concerned about this. Donald Trump has sued the Pulitzer Committee
trying to force him to withdraw those awards. This sort
of evidence, this FBI three h two interview report and
associated documents could become important civil evidence in Donald Trump's
quest to get the Pulitzer Committee to reverse this and
(13:46):
to potentially pay a penalty for defaming him.
Speaker 9 (13:49):
You broke this story, and you were the first to
make it public. In March of twenty twenty, the FBI,
for example, knew about the legitimacy, that they had verified
the authenticity of the Hunter Biden laptop. Then they went
on a mission to pre bunk that laptop. They knew
Rudy Giuliani's attorney, Bob Costello, had a copy of that laptop,
(14:12):
They knew that laptop would be made public before the election,
and yet they were meeting with big tech companies, you know,
on a weekly basis in the months leading up to
the twenty twenty election. New York Post breaks that story
and sure enough, big tech, even though the FBI knew
that it was true, they went to the big tech
(14:34):
companies like well then Twitter at the time and now
Meta but Facebook at the time and said, is this
what you've been warning about? This is likely Russian disinformation
or is it real? They knew the answer, wouldn't tell.
Speaker 5 (14:46):
Them, Yeah, that's exactly right now. Listen, there was a
large number of aiders and the betters and conspirators that
misled the American people for two consecutive elections, first twenty
sixteen on Russia Clue than twenty twenty one Hunter Biden,
quite frankly Joe Biden's ethical conduct, and most of them
(15:07):
still operate with impunity to y Some of lost their
in the Deep State, have lost their security occurrences, but
there's been very few penalties, and these publications still have
their rewards. These publications still continue dispute stories that we
can prove on a daily basis aren't true. And it'd
be so often they will throw in a little jab
to say, oh, yeah, we were wrong, and I just
(15:28):
want to point this out. You'll laugh at this. But
on Sunday, the New York Times had a long story
about a historian that they wanted to highlight and way
down in the thirtieth paragraph, I'm not making this up.
In the thirtieth paragraph of the story, out of the blue,
the New York Times writers said there was no substantiation
for russiaclusion. Now, it's hard to hear the New York
Times ever say that publicly they don't, but they stuck
(15:51):
it in the thirtieth paragraph of it.
Speaker 9 (15:52):
Well, I'll believe they believe that when they return their
pulletzer along with the Washington Post. But it will save
that for another day. John Solomon, justinnews dot com. Appreciate
you being with us, Appreciate your hard work. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 5 (16:05):
Thank you sean good to be with you eight.
Speaker 9 (16:07):
Hundred nine one, Shawn. Our number of your phone calls
coming up next.
Speaker 3 (16:12):
Check out the show twenty four to seven.
Speaker 5 (16:14):
Download it to your iPod via Hannity Insider at hannity
dot com.
Speaker 9 (16:19):
I'm twenty five now till the top of the hour
from our nation's capital, the Swamp the Sewer eight hundred
nine one Shawn. If you want to join us, don't
forget Monday. We will announce the winner to our Tesla contest.
And that winner, whoever.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
It ends up, it's not you. What's cutting.
Speaker 9 (16:36):
You're not allowed to I found out for sure. You're
definitely not allowed to register. If you registered, that means
you'd cheated.
Speaker 4 (16:42):
I told you I registered.
Speaker 9 (16:43):
Un Well, it's not that you don't need a new
car because you have a piece of crap old you know,
the worst car that Susie your car, which is so
weird and bizarre that you name it.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
It's not a boat. You name boats. You don't name cars. Oh,
someone actually reached out. They said they all a boat
one time.
Speaker 8 (17:01):
Called Airwaves had a little boat naming a vehicle.
Speaker 4 (17:08):
Everybody, if you look at the back of any boat,
that's your name. On it. So weird, Okay, so weird.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
I've never seen except those people with vanity plates, you
know that name their cars.
Speaker 4 (17:20):
That's weird.
Speaker 8 (17:21):
I don't have a vanity First of all, your car
is a piece of garbage. If she's not, yes, she
is the government they them. I mean, I mean what
we have the do have the proper pronounces? She identified she?
Speaker 4 (17:34):
How do I know? Because she's a sexy, sassy susan.
And did she ever talk to you and say I
want this is my preferred She's like, listen, Linda, you
better get some. You don't know what you preferred pronouns?
Speaker 3 (17:44):
Anyway, that'll be Monday, we'll announce the winner of the
tesla contest.
Speaker 4 (17:47):
That will not be Linda.
Speaker 9 (17:48):
All right, spring is here with it unpredictable weather, and
with that, you don't want to be caught caught off
guard if severe storms or emergencies hit. Now that's where
rapid radios can ensure you stay in touch no matter
what Mother Nature may throw your way. Now they're ready
to go right out of the box. Rapid radios dot com.
They're walkie talkies, but their industrial strength, they're not a toy.
(18:10):
They have a nationwide LTE coverage network. It's one hundred
percent guaranteed private communication. And here's the beauty.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
You don't ever pay a penny, a monthly fee, a subscription,
nothing at all. You just can talk to let's say
your kids, but they're not on the internet if you
give them a phone, which is an added advantage, or
maybe an elderly relative wherever they happen to live in
the country, it's one touch connection, push of the button.
And or maybe you want to talk to your employees
(18:39):
and check on them. You never know where they are,
you never know what they're doing.
Speaker 4 (18:43):
Anyway.
Speaker 9 (18:44):
For a limited time, go to rapidradios dot com right
now and you'll save sixty percent off, plus you'll get
free ups shipping. Now if you use the promo code
Radio twenty five, you'll get an extra twenty five bucks
off and a free EMP protection bag. Just go to
rapid radios dot com and stay prepared.
Speaker 4 (19:03):
And you'll love this technology. All right.
Speaker 9 (19:05):
So last night on Hannity and the last time I
did this and bring on somebody from the left, it
is it is always me having to thread a needle
because I like to listen to feedback from this audience
and over the years, the feedback has been very consistent
that people some people don't like if I have any
(19:25):
liberal I'm considering they do kind of have a monopoly
on the rest of the state run legacy media mob. Okay,
and this this is my dilemma as a host. So
we brought Taylor Lorenzon last night, and she's the one
that was, you know, praising, joyful about Luigi Mangioni and
all the other comments that she made. Okay, So I
(19:46):
gonn to ask and try and get into the mindset
of somebody that would that thinks it's okay. And then
she actually put up the picture of the CEO of
Blue Cross, Blue Shield and confront them on what is
to me, you know, putting a smiley face as I
told her right to her face. On assassination culture, we see,
(20:07):
you know all the the would be assassins of Donald Trump,
We know all the threats that the president faces. He
just had two recent would be assassins that they discovered
Elon Musk. Not only they fire bombing his Tesla dealerships
and firing bullets into them and putting Tesla's ablaze and
(20:29):
docksing Tesla owners and charging stations ablaze, but that that
is domestic terrorism. What happened to Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania
with the governor's mansion, that would be domestic terrorism. So
this this sympathy or silence in some cases towards this
(20:50):
violent culture is is solely are now emerging on the left.
You know the fact that they don't want to criticize
these pro Hamas radicals that are on college campuses. Now,
Hamas is a designated terrorist organization whose very charter calls
for the destruction of Israel. And I'm not sure what
(21:11):
part of October seventh they don't understand, because on that
day the Israelis lost the equivalent of forty thousand Americans
that would have been killed in a single day. And
I don't know what part of murder, rape, torture, kidnapping,
beheadings they don't understand. But they've become prominent voices not
only on college campuses, but in the halls of Congress.
(21:32):
Very frustrating this obsession that we see on the left
when it comes to Luigi Mangione, and I have a
hard time understanding that. I have a hard time understanding,
you know, people like Taylor that had actually said Oh,
I'm so disappointed that I had heard Joe Biden died,
but he didn't die. I don't like Joe Biden. I
don't wish Joe Biden dead. And I think it's kind
(21:55):
of a sick, ugly culture. So here's my dilemma. I
put her on last night and I start asking her
about it. She wants to only debate the healthcare system. Well,
a lot of people hate healthcare provi. I'm not asking
you about that. I'm asking you why you are saying
he's cansome and intelligent and you felt joy, etc.
Speaker 4 (22:15):
Etc.
Speaker 9 (22:16):
And I want to understand the mindset that was the
focus of the segment. She doesn't want to talk about
the folks. She wants to distract, divert, and obfuscate any
real discussion about the things that she's been saying that
sound awfully supportive to me about this culture.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Here's my dilemma. Some of you don't even like the
fact that I have her on. Okay, fair criticism.
Speaker 4 (22:40):
I have to.
Speaker 9 (22:41):
I have to balance the show and occasionally put on
people that I disagree with. Then if I let her
talk uninterrupted and she's not answering my question, there are
going to be many at home that are furious with
me for not stepping in and challenging her, especially when
when she's starts out by not answering the question every time.
(23:03):
And then there's another group of people that if I'm interrupted,
why don't you let her finish because she's not answering
the question. And I'm trying, in the limited time I
have on TV in a segment like this seven minutes,
ten minutes, whatever it ends up being, I need answers
to questions. I need a real dialogue, and somebody that's
gonna filibuster I'm not getting anywhere with that, So I'm
(23:25):
going to play this interview with that.
Speaker 4 (23:27):
Please keep that in mind.
Speaker 9 (23:30):
I can't win for losing in these situations because the
people that don't like confrontation, interruption, and then the people
that want me to hold this woman's feet to the fire,
keep her dialed in and focused and don't let her
off the map until she actually answers the question.
Speaker 4 (23:46):
I have to balance it.
Speaker 9 (23:47):
So I'm not gonna make everybody happy with this, but
I'm just trying to make you aware.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
I hope you will give me grace, but just notice
she won't answer. Let's play it from last night. All right,
try to explain this to me. You feel joy? Those
are your words. You felt joy over the murder of
this father. No, those are the words you use. You
can shake your head all you want, and we have
the tape.
Speaker 4 (24:12):
We have the tape and number.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
Then you go on to say, and people wonder why
we want these executives dead. Then you posted an image
of the Blue Cross CEO, Kim Keck. Now, let me
ask you, what part of this United Healthcare ceo being
a father and a husband don't you understand? And what
part of you having a choice of what healthcare provider
(24:37):
you choose to deal with or not.
Speaker 4 (24:40):
Do you not understand?
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Because you don't have to go with United, you don't
have to go with Blue Cross.
Speaker 2 (24:45):
So let me just be extra clearer. Never did I
say that I felt joy in his death. I said
very explicitly, if you play the full segment, and actually
people can watch that segment on my YouTube infull, not
the edited version that Pears showed. I said that I
felt joy, along with millions of other Americans, that the
brutality of our healthcare system was finally being acknowledged. I
(25:06):
believe that our current healthcare system is murderous, right, I mean,
we have uninsured Americans with a forty percent higher risk
of death compared to insured.
Speaker 3 (25:14):
Counterwords, that's not your topic.
Speaker 2 (25:18):
Good to lack of health insurance.
Speaker 4 (25:19):
Tiler, that's not the topic. If you can talk about healthcare.
Speaker 3 (25:22):
I don't like the healthcare system either, and a lot
of people have experienced frustration like you're saying. That to
me is separate and apart from the debate of praising
calling handsome smart intelligence, being joyful over the death and
assassination of innocent people. And that's what your comments did.
Your comments basically put your seal of approval on murder
(25:46):
and assassination. And I'm trying to understand whether you like
this guy, like the way he.
Speaker 4 (25:51):
Does business or not.
Speaker 3 (25:53):
You're advocating and putting a smiley face on assassination, and
I'm trying to understand what is in your soul that
doesn't understand he's a father and a husband here, What
are you missing? He seems to be a missing chip
with you.
Speaker 2 (26:10):
Sure if you'd like to hear you know, I will
need to talk in order to explain the rationalization.
Speaker 3 (26:16):
I want you to think about what you said, Explain
what you said.
Speaker 2 (26:21):
I again, I'm attempting to right now, so I'd ask
you to please give the space and try to listen here.
As I said once again, never did I say I
felt joy that this man died. I said again that
I felt joy that millions of Americans, or millions of
really wealthy Americans and privileged Americans are forcing forced to
wake up to the reality that nearly seventy thousand Americans
(26:41):
die each year due to lack of health insurance. I
do feel joyfulization.
Speaker 4 (26:45):
To the healthcare debate.
Speaker 3 (26:46):
Why would any human being with a conscience and soul
be joyful over an assassination of any person? Why would
anybody be joyful over that?
Speaker 4 (26:55):
Well, actually, that's a good question.
Speaker 2 (26:57):
Why don't I explain so great quo other clicks? So,
the other clip that you played is not me saying
my own beliefs. I have quite different beliefs from that
what I'm describing, And if you watch the full segment,
not just the clip, you'll see that I'm describing the
mentality of these fangirls that show up outside Luigi's court
and show up outside his jail cell. Those girls are
not me, Okay, we have very separate belief systems. But
(27:20):
I was describing how they believe. And now let me
explain to you why people in America feel this way.
People in America feel this way, and they feel outraged
because again, every penny of the twenty two billion dollars
in profit made by United Health was made at the
expense and suffering of others, and that is violence. Our
healthcare system is also violent, and that is a violence
that people in the mainstream media, such as yourself, continue
(27:43):
to refuse to acknowledge. So if you're going to talk
about death and violence, it's crucial you talk about the
violence more health person.
Speaker 3 (27:50):
Pardon, there's a better way than saying that that Luigi
Mangioni is a revolutionary who's famous, handsome, young, smart, that's.
Speaker 4 (28:00):
What you like, and.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
Holy and seems like he's a morally good man. If
you want to have legitimate criticism, you could write an
intelligent piece saying here is what's wrong with America's healthcare system, like,
for example, I want healthcare savings accounts. I would like
to see more of the use of telemedicine. I believe
in healthcare cooperatives. I know one that works. Josh umber Atlas, MD.
(28:29):
Average person twenty four hour concierge care fifty bucks a month.
Speaker 4 (28:33):
There are better ways to do it.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
That's a legitimate debate, but that's not how you're saying it.
You're saying it in ways that are sympathetic to the
people that are taking actions. Grandsome, good looking. This is
why people are happy and joyful.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
I'm describing the belief system of his supporter.
Speaker 3 (28:51):
Sean Taylor. Do you condemn people that call for assassination?
Speaker 2 (28:56):
You're going to ask if I condemn themas next? This
is crazy. I would love for you to acknowledge what
I'm actually saying, Sean, and we seem to be talking
past each other. I want to talk about the fact
I because of cost. We need to talk about the
seventy percent of Americans, by the way, believe that the
insurance company practices are responsible in part for Thompson's debt.
These are the signs that you.
Speaker 4 (29:17):
Want to put a rationalization.
Speaker 3 (29:18):
I am saying anybody that wants to assassinate anyone person
is wrong. I don't care if it's a Democrat or Republican,
or a father or a husband. And I speak that
is a simple truth that anyone with a heart would
easily say about National TV.
Speaker 4 (29:34):
You're having a hard time.
Speaker 2 (29:36):
If you want to prevent for their debts and you
don't want gun violence in the street, which I think
we both are aligned in wanting right, we want peace.
We do not want violence in this country. No matter
what side of the political isod's coming from. You need
to understand modis and you need to understand the ideology
that people have. And that is what let my first.
Speaker 4 (29:53):
Start with the basics.
Speaker 3 (29:54):
I'm going to help you out why to you first
condemn those that want to be involved in assassination and
stop talking about them being handsome and smart and intelligent.
Speaker 4 (30:03):
And I didn't say that I believed deriving.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
I am describing his supporters who do believe that. And
I think it's very important just the way that I
would try to understand the ideology.
Speaker 4 (30:13):
You condemn his supporters at large the.
Speaker 2 (30:16):
Right valley, I would try to understand the ideology of
any of anyone that would advocate for violences his supporters.
Once again, I believe in free speech. I believe in
free speech. If they have not committed any schools, the
supporters are outside just saying things, they're not committing any
sort of condemned.
Speaker 4 (30:34):
You won't condemn his supporters. You won't say what they're
doing is repulsive.
Speaker 2 (30:38):
Once again, Sean, I believe in free speech and the
rights of free expression. I seem to be in the
minor speech.
Speaker 3 (30:43):
Difference between assassination and speech. Do you condemn those that
support violence and in this case praise Luigi Mangone.
Speaker 2 (30:53):
You asked again the people that are showing up outside
an exercising their free their rights to be speech there
talking about the fact that over three hundred and twenty
thousand people died from lack of health insurance in the
first two.
Speaker 4 (31:04):
Years of the pedemistry dealing with us.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
Okay, I think that we need to acknowledge if we
ever want to place our system, we have a violent,
violent healthcare system, Sean, and it needs reform, and that's
what we should be focusing on. That's the violence we
should bene.
Speaker 3 (31:16):
And people that have a platform like yours should speak
out loudly and clearly and unambiguously.
Speaker 4 (31:22):
And you won't do it.
Speaker 9 (31:23):
All Right, that's going to wrap things up for today,
Hannity Tonight, nine Eastern on the Fox News Channel from
our Nation's Capital, Robert F. Kennedy Junior will join us.
By the way, you like comedian Tim Dillon, right, absolutely, yeah,
he's on tonight, Horace Cooper, Steven Miller, Victor Davis Hansen,
Jason Chafitz. Set your DVR nine Eastern Hannity on Fox.
(31:44):
We'll see you tonight. Back here on Monday. Have a
great Easter.
Speaker 3 (31:47):
Don't forget Monday, we announce our Tesla Contest winner. Have
a great passover, have a great Easter.
Speaker 9 (31:53):
God bless you and your families, and we'll see you
back here on Monday. We'll announce our Tesla Contest winner.
And again, have a great weekend with your family.
We will come out to your city doing the way
I get tals, saying you a conscious son will be entire.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Telling.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
And if you want a little banging and YI ain't
come along.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
With the greatest economic power in the world if we're smart.
Speaker 4 (00:22):
If we're not smart, our.
Speaker 5 (00:25):
Country very badly.
Speaker 6 (00:26):
The fact that no one is questioning his mental acuity
or fitness to serve is beyond wild to me.
Speaker 7 (00:32):
Right This fear that some members of the media had
sometimes that they would be perceived as helping Trump if
they somehow diminished by right, that it was some sort
of zero some game.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
Freedom is back in style.
Speaker 5 (00:47):
Welcome to the revolution that will come in.
Speaker 4 (00:52):
To your city.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Going the way I get tals and saying you a
conscious son.
Speaker 8 (01:00):
The New Sean Hennity Show more I'm the Scenes, information
on freaking news.
Speaker 5 (01:06):
And more boned inspired solutions for America.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
Speaker 9 (01:15):
All Right, News round Up, Information Overload. Our toll free
number is eight hundred and nine four one Sean. If
you want to be a part of the program, We're
going to get into great specificity in detail.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
In a moment.
Speaker 9 (01:26):
We'll be joined by founder, creator investigative reporter Justinnews dot
com our friend John Solomon. But it appears that the
Trump administration now has issued a criminal referral for the
New York State Attorney General Leticia James, related to mortgage
(01:48):
fraud by making false statements on bank lending applications to
receive more favorable terms. Now that's kind of exactly what
Letitia James tried to prosecute President Trump for as part
of her law fair campaign to bankrupt the Trump organization
with a half billion dollar fine. You might recall in
(02:08):
the civil case in New York we had this outrageous fine.
You might recall that the judge in that case, his
name was in Goron, you know, used a valuation of
mar A Lago at eighteen million dollars. If anybody wants
to go to Zillow or realtor dot com or any
other real estate website, you will see that mar A
(02:29):
Lago is much closer to a billion, if not over
a billion dollars in value. And the judge wouldn't even
allow real estate experts from Palm Beach to testify in
this case. But anyway, the director of the Federal Housing
Finance Agency sent a criminal referral to the DOJ alleging
Miss James falsified documents and property records to obtain loans.
(02:50):
In one incident cited in the referral, James claims she
lived in Virginia to purchase a home in Norfolk while
serving as the New York Attorney General, where she is
required to reside for her job. In a separate incident,
she allegedly mis represented the description of a property that
she owns in Brooklyn, New York, to meet the requirements
(03:11):
for a government back loan, and based on media reports,
Latisia James has in multiple instances falsified bank documents and
property records to acquire government backed assistants and loans with
more favorable law terms. It was sent to the Attorney
General Pam Bondi and the Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche
(03:32):
and they said they will be reviewing it. By the way,
a twenty sixteen report revealed that Latisia James had committed
at that time This is The New York Observer November eighteen,
twenty sixteen finance fraud and the city's campaign finance boards
left her with a five seven hundred and five dollars
fine for various violations committed by her twenty thirteen campaign
(03:54):
to become the city's watchdog. And she had put in
claims for public funds during that election cycle, received one
and fifty three fifty eight dollars in public moneys, and
she was fined fifteen hundred dollars for failing to file
pre election disclosure statements and got hit with, you know,
a penalty at that time. She is not the only
(04:16):
elected official that has these issues. But just as a
matter of recall, remember it's Letsia James that said no
one's above the law. This is before Donald Trump's civil
fraud trial.
Speaker 6 (04:30):
My message is simple, no matter how powerful you are,
no matter how much money you think you may have, no.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
One is above the law.
Speaker 6 (04:39):
And it is my responsibility and my duty in my
job to enforce it. The law is both powerful and fragile.
And today in court we will prove our case. I
thank you all for being here and again justice will prevail.
Speaker 9 (04:54):
Now, justice didn't prevail as one of the greatest injustices.
John Solomon, Founder, editor in chief, investigative reporter Justinnews dot com.
Your reaction to all of this, John Solomon, Well.
Speaker 5 (05:06):
I agree with Letitia James that nobody's above the law,
and she may soon find that that is the case.
And as you pointed out, she did have this problem
a decade ago with campaign finances not complying with the law.
They're pretty egregious situation a decade ago, so there's already
a warning sign about her compliance with the law. If
you go out and you get a federally backed mortgage
or a mortgage regulated by the federal government, and you
(05:29):
don't comply with the law, you can face very serious consequences.
We know that because another prosecutor, another Democrat, in another
Blue state, just a year ago, the former Baltimore State's
Attorney went I was convicted in a very serious crime,
which are doing something very similar to what Letitia James
is now accused of. So this is serious stuff. Usually
(05:50):
mortgage fraud is a slam dunk case in the courts.
So if this moves forward, if the evidence that team
Federal Housing Finance Agency has provided to the Justice Department
checks out, if it's verified, and the FBICH goes confident
with it, the next step is likely a grand jury
investigation and the potential for an indictment of New York's
top law enforcement officials.
Speaker 9 (06:12):
Yeah, listen, there's other people that have had these allegations made.
One of them, if I'm not mistaken, is a guy
that I always often referred to as a congenital liar,
Adam Schiff. And if I'm not mistaken, didn't he get
one of those preempted pardons that in twenty twenty when
Trump was leaving office, said that it's outrageous and illegitimate
(06:37):
and should never be used. But yet Biden gave him
one out the door.
Speaker 5 (06:40):
Yeah, that's right. He did get one of the pampted
pardons in January, on January twentieth, as for conjunction to
his work with the January sixth Committee, he said he
didn't want it, he didn't need it, he disagreed with it,
but he took it. Now, there are two questions about
that part. One, is it as sweeping as has been
portrayed in the media. That will likely be tested in
the courts at some point. But two, if you're involved
(07:03):
in a mortgage matter, you can also be civilly sued.
A pardon doesn't protect you from civil liability. So there
are two routes in these mortgage cases where people can
get pursued. One of those is criminal, like what we
saw the referral yesterday referred to in other places, you
can be sued civilly for mortgage frauds, something that we
saw a lot of during the SNL scandal and other
prior scandal.
Speaker 9 (07:23):
By the way, wasn't that the civil trial in New
York against Donald Trump.
Speaker 5 (07:27):
There was a case of that exactly there. That shows
you the liability of Letitia James took the civil route
to create consequences for Donald Trump. So just the pardon
hasn't totally cleared any liability away from Adam Schiff yet.
And you know, Adam Schiff is remarkable. He's always on
his moral high horse. But you look over the years
(07:48):
how much he misled the American people under the color
of government, under the color of being an Intelligence committee
or a member of Congress. We now know that massive
things that he said at the time not true, and
he would have had to have known they were not
true because he was getting briefed on the Intelligence Committee
and the Gang of Eight and other Gang of Eight
members obviously wouldn't say what he said because they knew
(08:10):
it wasn't true. So the history of Adam Shipp precedes
this concern. We wrote about this last year. There's a
Senate ethics complaint pending against him on that matter. On
mortgage is something similar. He claimed multiple houses as his
primary residents. You're only allowed to take one, and it
has to be the one that you live in most
of the time. So that's another lawmaker that potentially is
(08:34):
going to come up in the conversation when it comes
to Letitia.
Speaker 9 (08:37):
James, let's talk about other information and documents that you
have been able to examine in great detail as it
relates to Operation Crossfire Hurricane. You have found some information
that I think is extremely enlightening. After James Comey was
fired four months into President Trump's administration, you add t
(09:00):
but like Rod Rosenstein and Andrew Weisman, I believe Correct
me if I'm wrong. Were they not talking about invoking
the twenty fifth Amendment and removing Donald Trump from office?
And correct me if I'm wrong. Wasn't everybody warned in
August of twenty twenty by Bruce or that the dirty
Russian disinformation Hillary Clinton bought and paid for Russian dossier
(09:23):
wasn't that? Didn't they say it was a political document
and it was not to be trusted, and didn't James
Comy move forward and get not one but four separate
Faiza Warrens. Didn't James Comy sign three of the four?
Didn't Rod Rosenstein sign one of those? What do you
make of these new documents?
Speaker 5 (09:44):
They're very confirming of the narrative that we so carefully
built with facts over the last eight years that the
Russia collusion story was never about evidence, was never about facts,
was never about wrongdoing by Donald Trump or any of
his things. It was about creating a political consequence to
keep Donald Trump from becoming the president or effectively executing
(10:06):
his plan as president. There are instances in these documents
where you see people acknowledging that they were considering wearing
a wire to capture the president or entrap the president
in a conversation, and they're doing that after the first
round of evidence falls apart, once they find out the
Christopher Steel dossier is garbage. That's the word I think
(10:27):
Bob Woodward wants to use for it. Once they found
out that the evidence against Mike Flynn wasn't true, there
was no basis to pursue Mike Flinn. Once they had
captured Carter Page and George Papadopolos on intercept saying we
would never do those things. We're patriots, we wouldn't sell
out our country to Russia. When they couldn't get the
original allegation through, they just pivoted to try to create
new crimes to investigate great process crimes. This was never
(10:51):
about following the law or enforcing the law, having real
evidence that would back a criminal conspiracy. Remember, John Durham
has concluded there was no eviden to justify the opening
across by hurricane. But every time any notion of an
allegation fell apart, they just simply created a new allegation,
until finally it stopped because Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows
(11:13):
and Chuck Grassley and John Johnson and Sean Henny and
John Solomon, Sarah Carter got the facts out. At some
point the game was up. But these documents show it
was a get Trump operation and evidence did not matter.
Speaker 4 (11:27):
What else did you discover?
Speaker 9 (11:28):
You found a few other nuggets who were speaking late
at night this week, and you found a few other
nuggets that a lot of people haven't picked up on.
Speaker 5 (11:37):
Yeah, this is I think a really important one because,
as you have so eloquently helped people understand over the years,
the intelligence community, the deep state, the FBI bad actors
could not have carried out this scam on the American
people if they didn't have complicitest players in the news media.
The news media drove the hysteria, created the perception there
(11:58):
was something there when there was nothing there. Again, another
player in this drama that didn't care much about the facts.
They cared about the headlines and the clicks and the
possibility of knocking Donald Trump out of the presidency having
another water Gate. How many times did wear Watergate? This
wasn't even remotely close to the water and didn't have
any crime. But the Washington Post and the New York Times,
(12:18):
as we've reported, they won Pulitzers in twenty eighteen for
their reporting on this. We now have for the first
time direct proof from the FBI files that classified by
Donald Trump released by Cash Mattel that a story in
the Washington Post Pulitzer submission is wrong. They reported that
in a conversation, and this is one that was in
(12:39):
the Pulitzer package. So it's a Pulitzer winning article that
Donald Trump tried to pressure the NSA director. Obama's former
NSA director who carried over into the Trump administration to
say that there was no truth to the Russian hacking
or interference in the election. That's not what Donald Trump said.
In fact, when he was interviewed, the NSA director said
(13:01):
very clearly, the Washington Post story is wrong. And it's
not only wrong, based on my recollection, there was a
contemporaneous document that was written about the conversation that shows
exactly what was said and it's not what the Washington
Post reported. For the very first time, we know a
Politzer Prize top journalism award winning article in that compilation
(13:23):
is actually demonstrably false. Now you'll say, well, it's great
for history, but there's actually a current reason to be
concerned about this. Donald Trump has sued the Pulitzer Committee
trying to force him to withdraw those awards. This sort
of evidence, this FBI three h two interview report and
associated documents could become important civil evidence in Donald Trump's
quest to get the Pulitzer Committee to reverse this and
(13:46):
to potentially pay a penalty for defaming him.
Speaker 9 (13:49):
You broke this story, and you were the first to
make it public. In March of twenty twenty, the FBI,
for example, knew about the legitimacy, that they had verified
the authenticity of the Hunter Biden laptop. Then they went
on a mission to pre bunk that laptop. They knew
Rudy Giuliani's attorney, Bob Costello, had a copy of that laptop,
(14:12):
They knew that laptop would be made public before the election,
and yet they were meeting with big tech companies, you know,
on a weekly basis in the months leading up to
the twenty twenty election. New York Post breaks that story
and sure enough, big tech, even though the FBI knew
that it was true, they went to the big tech
(14:34):
companies like well then Twitter at the time and now
Meta but Facebook at the time and said, is this
what you've been warning about? This is likely Russian disinformation
or is it real? They knew the answer, wouldn't tell.
Speaker 5 (14:46):
Them, Yeah, that's exactly right now. Listen, there was a
large number of aiders and the betters and conspirators that
misled the American people for two consecutive elections, first twenty
sixteen on Russia Clue than twenty twenty one Hunter Biden,
quite frankly Joe Biden's ethical conduct, and most of them
(15:07):
still operate with impunity to y Some of lost their
in the Deep State, have lost their security occurrences, but
there's been very few penalties, and these publications still have
their rewards. These publications still continue dispute stories that we
can prove on a daily basis aren't true. And it'd
be so often they will throw in a little jab
to say, oh, yeah, we were wrong, and I just
(15:28):
want to point this out. You'll laugh at this. But
on Sunday, the New York Times had a long story
about a historian that they wanted to highlight and way
down in the thirtieth paragraph, I'm not making this up.
In the thirtieth paragraph of the story, out of the blue,
the New York Times writers said there was no substantiation
for russiaclusion. Now, it's hard to hear the New York
Times ever say that publicly they don't, but they stuck
(15:51):
it in the thirtieth paragraph of it.
Speaker 9 (15:52):
Well, I'll believe they believe that when they return their
pulletzer along with the Washington Post. But it will save
that for another day. John Solomon, justinnews dot com. Appreciate
you being with us, Appreciate your hard work. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 5 (16:05):
Thank you sean good to be with you eight.
Speaker 9 (16:07):
Hundred nine one, Shawn. Our number of your phone calls
coming up next.
Speaker 3 (16:12):
Check out the show twenty four to seven.
Speaker 5 (16:14):
Download it to your iPod via Hannity Insider at hannity
dot com.
Speaker 9 (16:19):
I'm twenty five now till the top of the hour
from our nation's capital, the Swamp the Sewer eight hundred
nine one Shawn. If you want to join us, don't
forget Monday. We will announce the winner to our Tesla contest.
And that winner, whoever.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
It ends up, it's not you. What's cutting.
Speaker 9 (16:36):
You're not allowed to I found out for sure. You're
definitely not allowed to register. If you registered, that means
you'd cheated.
Speaker 4 (16:42):
I told you I registered.
Speaker 9 (16:43):
Un Well, it's not that you don't need a new
car because you have a piece of crap old you know,
the worst car that Susie your car, which is so
weird and bizarre that you name it.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
It's not a boat. You name boats. You don't name cars. Oh,
someone actually reached out. They said they all a boat
one time.
Speaker 8 (17:01):
Called Airwaves had a little boat naming a vehicle.
Speaker 4 (17:08):
Everybody, if you look at the back of any boat,
that's your name. On it. So weird, Okay, so weird.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
I've never seen except those people with vanity plates, you
know that name their cars.
Speaker 4 (17:20):
That's weird.
Speaker 8 (17:21):
I don't have a vanity First of all, your car
is a piece of garbage. If she's not, yes, she
is the government they them. I mean, I mean what
we have the do have the proper pronounces? She identified she?
Speaker 4 (17:34):
How do I know? Because she's a sexy, sassy susan.
And did she ever talk to you and say I
want this is my preferred She's like, listen, Linda, you
better get some. You don't know what you preferred pronouns?
Speaker 3 (17:44):
Anyway, that'll be Monday, we'll announce the winner of the
tesla contest.
Speaker 4 (17:47):
That will not be Linda.
Speaker 9 (17:48):
All right, spring is here with it unpredictable weather, and
with that, you don't want to be caught caught off
guard if severe storms or emergencies hit. Now that's where
rapid radios can ensure you stay in touch no matter
what Mother Nature may throw your way. Now they're ready
to go right out of the box. Rapid radios dot com.
They're walkie talkies, but their industrial strength, they're not a toy.
(18:10):
They have a nationwide LTE coverage network. It's one hundred
percent guaranteed private communication. And here's the beauty.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
You don't ever pay a penny, a monthly fee, a subscription,
nothing at all. You just can talk to let's say
your kids, but they're not on the internet if you
give them a phone, which is an added advantage, or
maybe an elderly relative wherever they happen to live in
the country, it's one touch connection, push of the button.
And or maybe you want to talk to your employees
(18:39):
and check on them. You never know where they are,
you never know what they're doing.
Speaker 4 (18:43):
Anyway.
Speaker 9 (18:44):
For a limited time, go to rapidradios dot com right
now and you'll save sixty percent off, plus you'll get
free ups shipping. Now if you use the promo code
Radio twenty five, you'll get an extra twenty five bucks
off and a free EMP protection bag. Just go to
rapid radios dot com and stay prepared.
Speaker 4 (19:03):
And you'll love this technology. All right.
Speaker 9 (19:05):
So last night on Hannity and the last time I
did this and bring on somebody from the left, it
is it is always me having to thread a needle
because I like to listen to feedback from this audience
and over the years, the feedback has been very consistent
that people some people don't like if I have any
(19:25):
liberal I'm considering they do kind of have a monopoly
on the rest of the state run legacy media mob. Okay,
and this this is my dilemma as a host. So
we brought Taylor Lorenzon last night, and she's the one
that was, you know, praising, joyful about Luigi Mangioni and
all the other comments that she made. Okay, So I
(19:46):
gonn to ask and try and get into the mindset
of somebody that would that thinks it's okay. And then
she actually put up the picture of the CEO of
Blue Cross, Blue Shield and confront them on what is
to me, you know, putting a smiley face as I
told her right to her face. On assassination culture, we see,
(20:07):
you know all the the would be assassins of Donald Trump,
We know all the threats that the president faces. He
just had two recent would be assassins that they discovered
Elon Musk. Not only they fire bombing his Tesla dealerships
and firing bullets into them and putting Tesla's ablaze and
(20:29):
docksing Tesla owners and charging stations ablaze, but that that
is domestic terrorism. What happened to Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania
with the governor's mansion, that would be domestic terrorism. So
this this sympathy or silence in some cases towards this
(20:50):
violent culture is is solely are now emerging on the left.
You know the fact that they don't want to criticize
these pro Hamas radicals that are on college campuses. Now,
Hamas is a designated terrorist organization whose very charter calls
for the destruction of Israel. And I'm not sure what
(21:11):
part of October seventh they don't understand, because on that
day the Israelis lost the equivalent of forty thousand Americans
that would have been killed in a single day. And
I don't know what part of murder, rape, torture, kidnapping,
beheadings they don't understand. But they've become prominent voices not
only on college campuses, but in the halls of Congress.
(21:32):
Very frustrating this obsession that we see on the left
when it comes to Luigi Mangione, and I have a
hard time understanding that. I have a hard time understanding,
you know, people like Taylor that had actually said Oh,
I'm so disappointed that I had heard Joe Biden died,
but he didn't die. I don't like Joe Biden. I
don't wish Joe Biden dead. And I think it's kind
(21:55):
of a sick, ugly culture. So here's my dilemma. I
put her on last night and I start asking her
about it. She wants to only debate the healthcare system. Well,
a lot of people hate healthcare provi. I'm not asking
you about that. I'm asking you why you are saying
he's cansome and intelligent and you felt joy, etc.
Speaker 4 (22:15):
Etc.
Speaker 9 (22:16):
And I want to understand the mindset that was the
focus of the segment. She doesn't want to talk about
the folks. She wants to distract, divert, and obfuscate any
real discussion about the things that she's been saying that
sound awfully supportive to me about this culture.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Here's my dilemma. Some of you don't even like the
fact that I have her on. Okay, fair criticism.
Speaker 4 (22:40):
I have to.
Speaker 9 (22:41):
I have to balance the show and occasionally put on
people that I disagree with. Then if I let her
talk uninterrupted and she's not answering my question, there are
going to be many at home that are furious with
me for not stepping in and challenging her, especially when
when she's starts out by not answering the question every time.
(23:03):
And then there's another group of people that if I'm interrupted,
why don't you let her finish because she's not answering
the question. And I'm trying, in the limited time I
have on TV in a segment like this seven minutes,
ten minutes, whatever it ends up being, I need answers
to questions. I need a real dialogue, and somebody that's
gonna filibuster I'm not getting anywhere with that, So I'm
(23:25):
going to play this interview with that.
Speaker 4 (23:27):
Please keep that in mind.
Speaker 9 (23:30):
I can't win for losing in these situations because the
people that don't like confrontation, interruption, and then the people
that want me to hold this woman's feet to the fire,
keep her dialed in and focused and don't let her
off the map until she actually answers the question.
Speaker 4 (23:46):
I have to balance it.
Speaker 9 (23:47):
So I'm not gonna make everybody happy with this, but
I'm just trying to make you aware.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
I hope you will give me grace, but just notice
she won't answer. Let's play it from last night. All right,
try to explain this to me. You feel joy? Those
are your words. You felt joy over the murder of
this father. No, those are the words you use. You
can shake your head all you want, and we have
the tape.
Speaker 4 (24:12):
We have the tape and number.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
Then you go on to say, and people wonder why
we want these executives dead. Then you posted an image
of the Blue Cross CEO, Kim Keck. Now, let me
ask you, what part of this United Healthcare ceo being
a father and a husband don't you understand? And what
part of you having a choice of what healthcare provider
(24:37):
you choose to deal with or not.
Speaker 4 (24:40):
Do you not understand?
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Because you don't have to go with United, you don't
have to go with Blue Cross.
Speaker 2 (24:45):
So let me just be extra clearer. Never did I
say that I felt joy in his death. I said
very explicitly, if you play the full segment, and actually
people can watch that segment on my YouTube infull, not
the edited version that Pears showed. I said that I
felt joy, along with millions of other Americans, that the
brutality of our healthcare system was finally being acknowledged. I
(25:06):
believe that our current healthcare system is murderous, right, I mean,
we have uninsured Americans with a forty percent higher risk
of death compared to insured.
Speaker 3 (25:14):
Counterwords, that's not your topic.
Speaker 2 (25:18):
Good to lack of health insurance.
Speaker 4 (25:19):
Tiler, that's not the topic. If you can talk about healthcare.
Speaker 3 (25:22):
I don't like the healthcare system either, and a lot
of people have experienced frustration like you're saying. That to
me is separate and apart from the debate of praising
calling handsome smart intelligence, being joyful over the death and
assassination of innocent people. And that's what your comments did.
Your comments basically put your seal of approval on murder
(25:46):
and assassination. And I'm trying to understand whether you like
this guy, like the way he.
Speaker 4 (25:51):
Does business or not.
Speaker 3 (25:53):
You're advocating and putting a smiley face on assassination, and
I'm trying to understand what is in your soul that
doesn't understand he's a father and a husband here, What
are you missing? He seems to be a missing chip
with you.
Speaker 2 (26:10):
Sure if you'd like to hear you know, I will
need to talk in order to explain the rationalization.
Speaker 3 (26:16):
I want you to think about what you said, Explain
what you said.
Speaker 2 (26:21):
I again, I'm attempting to right now, so I'd ask
you to please give the space and try to listen here.
As I said once again, never did I say I
felt joy that this man died. I said again that
I felt joy that millions of Americans, or millions of
really wealthy Americans and privileged Americans are forcing forced to
wake up to the reality that nearly seventy thousand Americans
(26:41):
die each year due to lack of health insurance. I
do feel joyfulization.
Speaker 4 (26:45):
To the healthcare debate.
Speaker 3 (26:46):
Why would any human being with a conscience and soul
be joyful over an assassination of any person? Why would
anybody be joyful over that?
Speaker 4 (26:55):
Well, actually, that's a good question.
Speaker 2 (26:57):
Why don't I explain so great quo other clicks? So,
the other clip that you played is not me saying
my own beliefs. I have quite different beliefs from that
what I'm describing, And if you watch the full segment,
not just the clip, you'll see that I'm describing the
mentality of these fangirls that show up outside Luigi's court
and show up outside his jail cell. Those girls are
not me, Okay, we have very separate belief systems. But
(27:20):
I was describing how they believe. And now let me
explain to you why people in America feel this way.
People in America feel this way, and they feel outraged
because again, every penny of the twenty two billion dollars
in profit made by United Health was made at the
expense and suffering of others, and that is violence. Our
healthcare system is also violent, and that is a violence
that people in the mainstream media, such as yourself, continue
(27:43):
to refuse to acknowledge. So if you're going to talk
about death and violence, it's crucial you talk about the
violence more health person.
Speaker 3 (27:50):
Pardon, there's a better way than saying that that Luigi
Mangioni is a revolutionary who's famous, handsome, young, smart, that's.
Speaker 4 (28:00):
What you like, and.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
Holy and seems like he's a morally good man. If
you want to have legitimate criticism, you could write an
intelligent piece saying here is what's wrong with America's healthcare system, like,
for example, I want healthcare savings accounts. I would like
to see more of the use of telemedicine. I believe
in healthcare cooperatives. I know one that works. Josh umber Atlas, MD.
(28:29):
Average person twenty four hour concierge care fifty bucks a month.
Speaker 4 (28:33):
There are better ways to do it.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
That's a legitimate debate, but that's not how you're saying it.
You're saying it in ways that are sympathetic to the
people that are taking actions. Grandsome, good looking. This is
why people are happy and joyful.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
I'm describing the belief system of his supporter.
Speaker 3 (28:51):
Sean Taylor. Do you condemn people that call for assassination?
Speaker 2 (28:56):
You're going to ask if I condemn themas next? This
is crazy. I would love for you to acknowledge what
I'm actually saying, Sean, and we seem to be talking
past each other. I want to talk about the fact
I because of cost. We need to talk about the
seventy percent of Americans, by the way, believe that the
insurance company practices are responsible in part for Thompson's debt.
These are the signs that you.
Speaker 4 (29:17):
Want to put a rationalization.
Speaker 3 (29:18):
I am saying anybody that wants to assassinate anyone person
is wrong. I don't care if it's a Democrat or Republican,
or a father or a husband. And I speak that
is a simple truth that anyone with a heart would
easily say about National TV.
Speaker 4 (29:34):
You're having a hard time.
Speaker 2 (29:36):
If you want to prevent for their debts and you
don't want gun violence in the street, which I think
we both are aligned in wanting right, we want peace.
We do not want violence in this country. No matter
what side of the political isod's coming from. You need
to understand modis and you need to understand the ideology
that people have. And that is what let my first.
Speaker 4 (29:53):
Start with the basics.
Speaker 3 (29:54):
I'm going to help you out why to you first
condemn those that want to be involved in assassination and
stop talking about them being handsome and smart and intelligent.
Speaker 4 (30:03):
And I didn't say that I believed deriving.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
I am describing his supporters who do believe that. And
I think it's very important just the way that I
would try to understand the ideology.
Speaker 4 (30:13):
You condemn his supporters at large the.
Speaker 2 (30:16):
Right valley, I would try to understand the ideology of
any of anyone that would advocate for violences his supporters.
Once again, I believe in free speech. I believe in
free speech. If they have not committed any schools, the
supporters are outside just saying things, they're not committing any
sort of condemned.
Speaker 4 (30:34):
You won't condemn his supporters. You won't say what they're
doing is repulsive.
Speaker 2 (30:38):
Once again, Sean, I believe in free speech and the
rights of free expression. I seem to be in the
minor speech.
Speaker 3 (30:43):
Difference between assassination and speech. Do you condemn those that
support violence and in this case praise Luigi Mangone.
Speaker 2 (30:53):
You asked again the people that are showing up outside
an exercising their free their rights to be speech there
talking about the fact that over three hundred and twenty
thousand people died from lack of health insurance in the
first two.
Speaker 4 (31:04):
Years of the pedemistry dealing with us.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
Okay, I think that we need to acknowledge if we
ever want to place our system, we have a violent,
violent healthcare system, Sean, and it needs reform, and that's
what we should be focusing on. That's the violence we
should bene.
Speaker 3 (31:16):
And people that have a platform like yours should speak
out loudly and clearly and unambiguously.
Speaker 4 (31:22):
And you won't do it.
Speaker 9 (31:23):
All Right, that's going to wrap things up for today,
Hannity Tonight, nine Eastern on the Fox News Channel from
our Nation's Capital, Robert F. Kennedy Junior will join us.
By the way, you like comedian Tim Dillon, right, absolutely, yeah,
he's on tonight, Horace Cooper, Steven Miller, Victor Davis Hansen,
Jason Chafitz. Set your DVR nine Eastern Hannity on Fox.
(31:44):
We'll see you tonight. Back here on Monday. Have a
great Easter.
Speaker 3 (31:47):
Don't forget Monday, we announce our Tesla Contest winner. Have
a great passover, have a great Easter.
Speaker 9 (31:53):
God bless you and your families, and we'll see you
back here on Monday. We'll announce our Tesla Contest winner.
And again, have a great weekend with your family.
The Sean Hannity Show News
Host
Sean Hannity
Popular Podcasts
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Decisions, Decisions
Welcome to "Decisions, Decisions," the podcast where boundaries are pushed, and conversations get candid! Join your favorite hosts, Mandii B and WeezyWTF, as they dive deep into the world of non-traditional relationships and explore the often-taboo topics surrounding dating, sex, and love. Every Monday, Mandii and Weezy invite you to unlearn the outdated narratives dictated by traditional patriarchal norms. With a blend of humor, vulnerability, and authenticity, they share their personal journeys navigating their 30s, tackling the complexities of modern relationships, and engaging in thought-provoking discussions that challenge societal expectations. From groundbreaking interviews with diverse guests to relatable stories that resonate with your experiences, "Decisions, Decisions" is your go-to source for open dialogue about what it truly means to love and connect in today's world. Get ready to reshape your understanding of relationships and embrace the freedom of authentic connections—tune in and join the conversation!