Hillary Clinton's private server scandal continues to grow

Cybersecurity and legal reaction to the e-mail saga on 'Hannity'


This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," August 20, 2015. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: Welcome to "Hannity." There are more questions than answers when it comes to Hillary Clinton's private server scandal, and tonight we're learning new information about the device that Clinton used to send e-mails during her tenure as secretary of state.

Standing by tonight in D.C. with the very latest is our own Catherine Herridge. Catherine, this grows day by day by day!

CATHERINE HERRIDGE, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Well, it does, Sean. Buried in this new court document is the admission that Mrs. Clinton did not use a government-issued device that was certified as secure to handle sensitive or classified information, and the Blackberries used by her aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills were likely destroyed.

FOX News was first to confirm in March that Mrs. Clinton used an iPad that was not certified as secure, against the instructions of State Department IT specialists. The campaign has been silent on the issue.  Today, FOX put the question to the State Department.


JOHN KIRBY, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: There are -- I'll just say there are reviews and investigations going on right now, including by our IG and by Congress, and so it's going to be inappropriate for me to comment.


HERRIDGE: Meanwhile, the Denver IT firm that took over the server contract for the Clintons has now hired a crisis management team. And significantly, the firm has not been forthcoming about how they landed the contract in the first place.


ROSALIND S. HELDERMAN, WASHINGTON POST: They say that they submitted a proposal to the Clintons, Bill and Hillary Clinton, in 2013 and were hired. They did not tell us -- it was one of the questions we asked that they didn't answer, how they knew that that opportunity existed to submit the proposal.


HERRIDGE: And the decision to use a relatively small Denver firm with no experience handling a major contract involving classified information is described as highly unusual.


JOHN SCHINDLER, FMR. NSA COUNTER-INTEL OFFICER: It looks suspicious, I must say, as well, from a counterintelligence viewpoint. If were the FBI, I would definitely have questions about what the motivations were to choose firm that sounds, certainly, very unsuited to what the Clintons needed done, which was to secure some very sensitive records.


HERRIDGE: And late today, a federal court here in Washington, D.C., ordered the State Department to work directly with the FBI to recover any e-mails that they successfully find as the result of their investigation, Sean.

HANNITY: All right, Catherine, thank you.

And joining us now with more, cyber-security analyst, senior fellow at the Center for Digital Government is Morgan Right, and cyber-security co- chair at Pillsbury Winthrow Shaw Pittman (ph) Brian Finch is with us.

Morgan, I want to go back to your credentials. You worked for the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security. Other government agencies, as well?

MORGAN WRIGHT, CYBER-SECURITY ANALYST: Yes, I did a lot from the private sector, you know, especially helping these folks out, State Department, so did a lot of work, moved (ph) with a lot of these folks in the same areas.

HANNITY: All right, so would you say that the government system protecting e-mail from hackers is probably the safest that's out there?

WRIGHT: No. The government system isn't the safest. But Sean, I can tell what you isn't the safest. It's creating your own home-brewed system.  It's creating your own private server.

HANNITY: You mean like in a bathroom?

WRIGHT: Well, yes. You know, regardless where -- I can tell you, Sean, Brian and I were talking beforehand, the more I think about this, the more I look at this, the more I'm convinced from day one that the server was compromised. That's how bad this set-up was.

HANNITY: You know, John Kerry recently -- recently said, Brian, that -- that he thinks the Russians and Chinese are reading his e-mails. Now, I got to believe that John Kerry's system is safer than the system that we now know that Hillary was using in a bathroom in a loft of a mom and pop company, in a bathroom where they kept the server. I got to believe -- I'm not as sophisticated as you are on these matters of security. What do you think? Is that probably a good guess?

BRIAN FINCH, CYBER-SECURITY ANALYST: It's -- well, I can tell you certainly that the State Department is spending more money on cyber- security than the Clintons were on their server cyber-security. The State Department is spending tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars, and has the resources of the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies behind it to help with cyber-security.

We have not delved at all into what cyber-security precautions the Clintons had taken, other than Secretary Clinton's initial comment that the server was on grounds protected by the Secret Service, as if tapping into the server required someone to physically put a stethoscope to it. And we know that's not the case. That's not how breaking into a server works.  It's done electronically.

So all we can say is that there's certainly a lot more money and muscle and bodies behind what was being done for cyber-security from an official State Department perspective than what was being done from a Clinton perspective.

HANNITY: Let me ask both of you -- Morgan, I'll ask you first. What are the odds that the Russians, the Chinese, maybe the Iranians and other countries have all of the e-mails that were on that server, even the ones she tried to erase? Morgan?

WRIGHT: There's no odds involved here. I think it's a sure thing. I think they have it. I think they had it early on because, as John Kerry said, he expects the Chinese and Russians are reading his e-mails. They're also reading other world leaders' e-mails. So the first time Clinton e- mailed one of those from her HDR-22 (ph) account, they would have known it existed. I would have exploited it and attacked it four-and-a-half years ago. So I'm firmly convinced that our adversaries have more of the information than we do, right now.

HANNITY: Brian, do you agree with that assessment?

FINCH: Yes, I -- I agree completely with what Morgan has to say...


FINCH: ... and I think it's not just because of what other world leaders were doing and the lack of security from Clinton to other world leaders. You got to remember, too, Sean, that this wasn't just a server where Secretary Clinton was using it. This -- she had other people, the friends of Bill, the friends of Hillary had e-mail addresses on there.


HANNITY: Yes, all right, let -- Morgan, last question for you. The FBI says that they think they're going to be able to retrieve at least some of the erased information. Now, remember, she went through 66,000, erased 33,000, some of which were e-mails to her husband who never uses an e-mail.  So we know she lied there.

But what are the odds that she fully and completely through erasing and cleaning the server, not with a cloth, were able to actually get rid of them completely?

WRIGHT: You know, the thing that is going to weigh again her on this is the incompetence of the people who established her system in the first place. So I think based on that and what we know, there's a high probability that the FBI will recover a majority of the data that was attempted to be erased.

I used to train these guys. I trained other law enforcement officers in this. I'm firmly convinced that based on what we're hearing...


WRIGHT: ... and their methodologies, we're going to see some stuff.

HANNITY: Wow! All right, Morgan, Brian, thank you both. Appreciate it.

Now in studio with the legal reaction to the ongoing scandal, the host of "Justice," Judge Jeanine Pirro is with us. All right, assuming they're right, they think the 100 percent the Russians and the Chinese have it.  And they seem very confident that, in fact, the FBI will recover.

So here's the question. That means that if she lied, this is obstruction of justice. This takes to it a whole new level!

JEANINE PIRRO, HOST, "JUSTICE WITH JUDGE JEANINE": Well, look, there are a myriad of crimes she can be charged with. Number one, she had classified information on an unauthorized and not government server. She knew she wasn't supposed to do that. What you have to say is, why is it that within days of your being confirmed as secretary of state -- why did you need your own private server? Why did you put your pitbulls, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, on that same server? Why are their Blackberrys missing right now?

And why did she say, I never received or sent classified, and then she said "marked classified"? She keeps pulling back from it. You've destruction of evidence. You've got obstruction of Justice. You've got Federal Records Act violations. You got...


HANNITY: ... I'll put them up as we speak here. There's three specific laws that we found that...

PIRRO: There's at least seven that I've found.


PIRRO: The woman should be indicted!

HANNITY: All right, but now if the Russians -- if they're 100 percent right -- these are -- these are experts. These are the guys our government goes to. If they're right that, in facility, the Russians, Chinese, maybe the Iranians, others have this, then that would mean if she became president, she would be compromised. Vladimir Putin comes to the White House, comes in, he has the 33,000 e-mails she deleted, some of which would be damning to her and contradict everything she said and...


PIRRO: ... blackmail!

HANNITY: She's subject to blackmail!

HERRIDGE: But you know what? You don't even need to prove that.  What about the Clinton Foundation and the hundreds of millions of dollars...

HANNITY: That, too.

PIRRO: She is compromised by that. She forgets to put down that Saudi Arabia gave her $25 million.

And why is Huma Abedin being paid by the Clinton Foundation in addition to the Teneo law (ph) Clinton-connected business? Was this a mass criminal conspiracy? You've got co-conspirators! You've got people taking top secret off of e-mails! You've got everything the grand jury should be investigating right now!

HANNITY: I think there should be a grand jury call...

PIRRO: Absolutely. Right now!

HANNITY: All right, now we have to see whether or not -- how -- wait a minute -- how the Justice Department, which is not exactly -- it's been politicized -- what Loretta Lynch is going to do. Now, I believe a lot of the leaks have been coming from Valerie Jarrett. If so, with the tacit approval of Obama. And so...

PIRRO: That means Loretta gets permission.

HANNITY: That means she gets permission. So...

PIRRO: Now, let's assume that she doesn't do -- and I know Loretta Lynch. I know her to be competent, fair...

HANNITY: You trust her.

PIRRO: I do.

HANNITY: I don't.

PIRRO: Well, look, in the Obama administration, I problem should (INAUDIBLE) qualify that. But you know who I trust?


HANNITY: Jim Comey, former...

HANNITY: I do trust him.

PIRRO: Absolutely. He's a guy -- he's there for 10 years. When Obama goes, can he keep that evidence and bring it to the next president...


PIRRO: ... likelier attorney general?

HANNITY: You're a former district attorney yourself.

PIRRO: Right.

HANNITY: So I -- I'm reading you as saying you think she's cooked.  And I think the mistake that she made is she never thought they'd recover this. She thought she wiped it clean, eliminated the e-mails, got rid of the marks that said classified. She was too cute by half, not understanding the technology. True or false.

PIRRO: Well, you know, I could agree with that, as well. But here's the thing. The woman has danced with federal prosecutors her whole career!  She knows the loopholes. The fact that she set this up within days tells me that she had some reason to do all this. Was it to collect hundreds of millions of dollars...

HANNITY: She didn't want them subject to a congressional subpoena.

PIRRO: OK. Let me ask you another question.

HANNITY: Go ahead. You take over.

PIRRO: Why is that it this woman, all right, who's got all of these people around her -- why is she ignoring the freedom of information? Why doesn't she let the inspector general...

HANNITY: Because -- I'll tell you why. Because the Clintons have gotten away with so much over the years, she arrogantly believed that this would go away. And I actually think -- I don't think she's going to survive this.

PIRRO: She shouldn't survive! First of all, America doesn't believe her anymore. She's not trustworthy. But you know what? If General Petraeus, a four-star general, can be indicted and convicted, that's the least of the stuff that she's done!

HANNITY: What he did is minuscule in comparison!

PIRRO: Yes! Exactly!

HANNITY: All right.

PIRRO: She needs to be indicted!

HANNITY: Judge Jeanine Pirro -- guilty! OK, thank you.

PIRRO: Almost.

HANNITY: Coming up, Hillary Clinton's poll numbers are plummeting -- you can't believe it -- especially in very key swing states, especially when it come to trustworthiness and honesty. Ainsley Earhardt -- she's up next. She has a full report. Also, we'll check in with Peter Johnson, Jr., Kimberly Guilfoyle. They are here with reaction.

And then later tonight...


JEB BUSH, R-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Mr. Trump doesn't have a proven conservative record. He was a Democrat longer in he last decade than he was a Republican. He's given more money to Democrats than he's given to Republicans.

DONALD TRUMP, R-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don't see how he's electable.


HANNITY: Jeb Bush, Donald Trump go after each other at separate town hall events in New Hampshire. We have that and much, much more straight ahead.



HANNITY: Welcome back to "Hannity." So as the scandal surrounding Hillary Clinton's private server deepens, voters all across America -- they're starting to have serious doubts about the integrity of the 2016 Democratic front-runner.

Joining us now for a full report, "Fox & Friends First" co-host at the "Hannity" big board, Ainsley Earhardt -- Ainsley.

AINSLEY EARHARDT, CO-HOST, "FOX & FRIENDS FIRST": Hey, Sean. Thanks for having me on. Yes, on Tuesday, during her tense press conference, the 2016 Democratic front-runner, Hillary Clinton, made a point to tell reporters that they are the only people who seem to be raising concerns about her personal server.


QUESTION: (INAUDIBLE) your campaign?

HILLARY CLINTON, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  Nobody talks to me about it other than you guys.


EARHARDT: But in the wake of some disturbing new revelations, it turns out voters actually do have some very deep concerns about the trustworthiness of Hillary Clinton. According to a brand-new poll, a large majority of voters in three key swing states believe that Hillary Clinton is not an honest person. And that includes Ohio, where 60 percent of the voters there think the Democratic hopeful is not trustworthy. Then in Pennsylvania, a whopping 63 percent also have doubts about Hillary's honesty. And then down in Florida, that number has grown now to 64 percent.

In addition to these concerns about her trustworthiness, voters in those same swing states have a general negative opinion of the Democratic candidate. According to the same poll, 54 percent of Ohio voters view Clinton unfavorably. 55 percent of those polled have a disapproving opinion of Hillary in both Pennsylvania and down in Florida.

Hillary Clinton might be trying to say the controversy surrounding the improper use of her personal server are press-driven, but these troubling new polls are painting a much different picture. Sean, back to you.

HANNITY: All right, Ainsley, thanks so much.

And you know, as the server scandal continues to gain traction, Hillary Clinton's staffers -- they are in full spin mode. Watch this.


JENNIFER PALMIERI, CLINTON CAMPAIGN COMMUNICATIONS DIR.: She did have her own e-mail account. Others had done it before, and it was just more convenient and she kept it like that.

She had lawyers to look at all the e-mails to decide what was personal and what was official, and she decided to not retain the personal ones, and they were deleted.

Everyone's an expert on inflating footballs and now everybody's an expert on wiping servers.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I think that they'll find more e-mails -- to the extent that they're going through her -- the ones that were personal in nature, if they were able to retrieve them, I think that they'd just be finding more e-mails expressing her preference for iced tea.

There's been absolutely nothing controversial about any of the underlying e-mails that have come out.


HANNITY: Joining us now with reaction, FOX News legal analyst Peter Johnson, Jr., the co-host of "The Five," Kimberly Guilfoyle. Guys, good to see you.

Before we get to the legal aspect, let's -- I mean, a -- 64 percent of people in Florida, 60 in Ohio, 63 in Pennsylvania do not find her honest and trustworthy! How do you win an election, Peter, with those numbers?

PETER JOHNSON, JR., FOX LEGAL ANALYST: You have a hard time.  (INAUDIBLE) confidence and an integrity issue that's big, big time. And a lot of Americans are seeing it because they don't know why she had the server, what she did with the server. And now these incomprehensible explanations -- she didn't think it through. Secretary of state wants to be the president, didn't think it through.

And some other fellow who's a spokesman or something saying, Well, you're going to find things about iced tea. I want to know why there are 30,000 personal e-mails...

HANNITY: Yes, where did they go?

JOHNSON: ... out of 80,000. But what -- what -- what are they? And why was it in someone's bathtub or spa or...

HANNITY: Well, wait a minute. She did -- she did say she was communicating in part with her...

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST, "THE FIVE": In a bathroom in New Jersey!


HANNITY: ... bathroom in New Jersey, yes.


HANNITY: She said she was communicating with Bill, who doesn't e- mail. So that was a lie.

JOHNSON: No, no. It doesn't make any sense. And it's too cute by half. And then we have these jokes that the secretary of state makes, Oh, yes, I wiped it with...

GUILFOYLE: With a cloth.

JOHNSON: ... a cloth. And then Snapchat. And so, We are not amused, say the American people...


HANNITY: You mean wipe it, like, with, like, a cloth?

GUILFOYLE: A cloth, right.

HANNITY: Seriously?

GUILFOYLE: Well, we also know that she's also not qualified to be a comedian besides unqualified to be commander-in-chief with these lack of ethics. I mean, I think it's very obvious. It was duplicitous in its nature. She had an obligation to, in fact, handle this information properly and in a safe manner that was prescribed by law. She chose not to.

She clearly did not want the American people to see or read her e- mails. But when you're secretary of state, they don't belong to her. They belong to the taxpayers.

HANNITY: Let -- let -- only 2 percent in the FOX News poll last week think she's telling the truth about the server. Here's -- here's...

GUILFOYLE: And that's within the margin of error.


HANNITY: Here's the latest advancement in the story, though. She has said repeatedly that she did not send or receive classified material. Then it became marked as classified material. That evolved into the release late last night that, in fact, she did have classified material on her server.

JOHNSON: Well, this whole thing with classified, it's a game. Well, the real terminology is secret, top secret. And then they change what classified means. It's a word game that they're engaging in. But the issue really is, why, if you're a State Department official, the secretary of state, why can't you use the servers that the government...

HANNITY: Who wipes a server clean?

JOHNSON: ... has...

HANNITY: Who eliminates 33,000...

GUILFOYLE: The consciousness of guilt!

HANNITY: ... e-mails!

GUILFOYLE: Isn't it? If there's nothing to hide, then why are you doing that? It's improper handling...

HANNITY: Let me get your legal opinion on...

GUILFOYLE: ... of sensitive material.

HANNITY: We got three separate statutes. I'll put them up as we -- we talk about this. You've got -- pretty interesting statutes, very clear in terms of what the law is. You got 44 USC 3101. You got 18 USC 1924.  You've got 18 USC 2071.

Let me stay on that third one for just a second here. "Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper or any other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies or destroys the same shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years or both, and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office of the United States."

What's interesting about that is, you add a whole other element to those three laws, which is if she consciously erased them and the FBI retrieves them, that is now obstruction of justice!

GUILFOYLE: Yes. Correct.

HANNITY: What does the law say?

GUILFOYLE: So she's looking at penalties and fines. Yes, that's when people say, Oh, they're not going to get her. You'd be surprised. And then what's going to happen is they're going to try and turn someone within her inner circle, and there's people that are vulnerable that are also looking at potential criminal liability for any kind of part they might have played with obstruction of justice or deletion of e-mails or of this property.

And that's Human Abedin and Cheryl Mills, as well. So you can be certain -- and if it's Clinton style (ph), they'll look for someone to take the fall.

JOHNSON: It is an appearance of impropriety. I don't know what the facts are. And the Department of Justice better get to the facts really...

HANNITY: Grand jury, right?

JOHNSON: ... quickly. Well, it looks like it's going down that road because we know that a lot of people have been convicted for a lot less.

GUILFOYLE: Like General Petraeus under 18 USC!


HANNITY: ... a Marine who is being kicked out of the Marine Corps because he sent one e-mail that actually would have saved people's lives.

JOHNSON: That's true.

HANNITY: One little e-mail!


HANNITY: All right, let me -- let me ask -- change topics a little bit. Donald Trump -- the issue of the 14th Amendment has come up as it relates to immigration, quote, "anchor babies," which Hillary says you're not allowed to use that term.

But more important, I want to put up Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan.  He was the author of the 14th Amendment on this particular clause. And you can see every person -- he defines who will be -- the United States -- and then he says, This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, or belong to families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but every other class of persons."

Doesn't that -- considering he wrote the clause, doesn't that indicate that you cannot be an illegal immigrant in this country, have a baby and get -- get -- become a U.S. citizen?

JOHNSON: Yes, legislative intent is very important in the interpretation of laws. But I believe Donald Trump is wrong.

HANNITY: Wow! You and I disagree.

JOHNSON: He's absolutely wrong.

HANNITY: But he -- he...

JOHNSON: I represented Donald Trump. I like Donald Trump. He's making a lot of sense on a lot of issues.

HANNITY: But what about the author of that amendment?

JOHNSON: He's not making any sense on this particular issue...

HANNITY: But that sentence doesn't...

JOHNSON: ... whatsoever. You have to ignore a lot of precedent to accept that particular...

HANNITY: Well, but you can go back to Plessy versus Ferguson at almost the same time, the court interpretation has been wrong many, many times, right?

JOHNSON: Oh, absolutely, but...

GUILFOYLE: It's certainly open to interpretation and evaluation by a court based on some of that language that you cited there. Ultimately, I think, Peter, you're saying that you think he wouldn't prevail on a 14th Amendment, you know...

JOHNSON: I think it's a phony issue.

GUILFOYLE: ... challenge.

JOHNSON: And I think...

HANNITY: But even though author of the provision specifically said that...

JOHNSON: I think it's -- it's -- it's part of a political campaign.


JOHNSON: I don't think it holds any weight in a court of law.

HANNITY: You really surprised me like that. All right. We're going to have to bring you back...

GUILFOYLE: Shock and awe!

HANNITY: ... for that. Shock and awe.

JOHNSON: Absolutely!

HANNITY: All right, guys, good to see you both.

Coming up next tonight on this busy news night on "Hannity"...


TRUMP: Jeb Bush is a low-energy person. For him to get things done is hard.

BUSH: When people look at his record, it is not a conservative record even on immigration.


HANNITY: Donald Trump, Jeb Bush -- they traded jabs last night. They were both in New Hampshire hosting town halls. That's coming up next.

Later -- is President Obama the worst negotiator in history? You won't believe the latest news about this Iranian nuclear deal! We'll check in with Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters. He's here to explain as we continue.



HANNITY: Welcome back to "Hannity." So last night, Donald Trump and Jeb Bush had a showdown in New Hampshire. Now, the two GOP presidential candidates held rival town hall meetings just miles apart. Now, the candidates went toe to toe on immigration, and things even got personal.  Take a look.


TRUMP: They have to come in legally. They've got to come in -- if we don't have them come in legally, we don't have a country. Building the wall is something that has to happen. It's not expensive, won't be expensive.

BUSH: I don't believe that we should take people that are here in the shadows and deport them all. The cost of that would be in the hundreds of billions of dollars. It would rip up communities. It's not appropriate.  But criminals should be deported.

TRUMP: I would say between Common Core, his act of love on immigration, and skin in the game with Iraq -- that's the third one that we've now added -- I don't see how he is electable. Jeb Bush is a low- energy person. For him to get things done is hard. He's very low energy.

BUSH: Mr. Trump doesn't have a proven conservative record. He was a Democrat longer in the last decade than he was a Republican. He's given more money to Democrats than he's given to Republicans. When people look at his record, it is not a conservative record even on immigration.


HANNITY: Here with reaction, from The Washington Times, Charles Hurt, and from National Review, Rich Lowry is with us.

All right, what -- first reaction to that exchange.

RICH LOWRY, NATIONAL REVIEW: Well, first of all, Trump is just so mesmerizing at the moment because he says things that no one else in public life does. That he's attacking Bush for being a low-energy person...


LOWRY: ... is kind of incredible. I'm a little surprised that Jeb is directly engaging with him at this point because about a month ago, Jeb said, Look, I'm not going to talk about Trump anymore. And it shows how Trump has had much more staying power than most people would have expected...

HANNITY: But he has proven...

LOWRY: ... that Bush's is now (INAUDIBLE)

HANNITY: Talk about the staying power, Charles, I mean, he defies -- I keep saying it -- conventional political gravity. And he seems to come out of every controversy stronger than when he went in, right?

CHARLES HURT, WASHINGTON TIMES: Yes. I mean, there have even been some statements that he's made that sort of surprised me. And I thought that he might not make it through, and I've been pretty believing all along. And he's made it -- somehow makes it through.

But that particular tack that Rich was talking about on Jeb Bush is just devastating. And he may as well be talking about the entire Republican Party when he just talks about there's just no energy out there.

This is what I think is so appealing about Trump for so many people is that -- you know, he -- you know -- you know, a Jeb Bush event looks like some sort of country club rally, and a Donald Trump event looks like a monster truck event.

HANNITY: It's interesting you say -- I noticed that -- and I said this before, that the -- that some of the other candidates in the Republican Party in general could learn something from Donald Trump.

HURT: Yes! Of course!

HANNITY: And Scott Walker got very aggressive yesterday in attacking the D.C. establishment and saying that they had failed and been ineffective about repealing and replacing "Obama care," said it in a very forceful way.  I would argue he feels more emboldened because of Trump. True or false.

LOWRY: Well, there could be something to it. And there's no doubt Trump has captured people's imagination in a way no other candidate has done on the Republican side. And all the controversies have helped him because people are so sick of people having to apologize and cry and bow and scrape when they say something that's notionally offensive to the PC crowd.

And then also we shouldn't underestimate obviously, Sean, and you don't, the power of the immigration issue. And I think he is pointing the rest of the field in a more populist direction on immigration, which is a very good thing.

HANNITY: Let me go the issue that came up. Hillary Clinton comes out with an ad excoriating Donald Trump for daring to use the term "anchor baby," which is a justifiable term. Trump fires right back at a reporter who also wants him to stop using that term. Watch these two.


TRUMP: I'll use the word "anchor baby."

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So that you don't have these anchor babies as they're described coming into the country.

TRUMP: You mean it's not politically correct and yet everybody uses it? So you know what, give me a different term. Give me a different term.  What else would you like me to say? You want me to say that? I'll use the word "anchor baby." Excuse me. I'll use the word "anchor baby."


HANNITY: What other term? Charles, there is no other term to use.

CHARLES HURT, THE WASHINGTON TIMES: Well, you know, it is clear to me that we have seen over the years, and you've chronicled this, Sean, that the left has been very successful at sort of cowing the right, and even sort of like mainstream people, into thinking that everything is somehow racist, everything is somehow hurtful and everything is off the table.

But all Donald Trump is talking about doing is enforcing laws, such as, if you're here illegally, making you go home. And what is radical about enforcing laws that have been duly put on to the books? But the left has been so successful at terrifying everybody, even a lot of Republicans, from even sticking up for what is like, basically rational. And I think the American people are on Trump's side on this.

HANNITY: I actually hope Donald Trump tackles this horrific Iranian deal which we'll talk about more later because he seems to draw the attention. And 24 million people, I mean, the highest rated Republican primary debate in 2012 was 6.5 million people.

LOWRY: You can't take your eyes off them. If you look last night, and someone on another network was saying this, someone called them last night and said you have to look at Trump. An she said what channel? Every channel, because everybody is covering him wall to wall.

HANNITY: Do you like him?

LOWRY: I don't. I don't like him, I don't like his style. I understand a lot of his appeal, but for me, a conservative doesn't go out there, and this is something he said two weeks ago, and praise single payer health care and say it works in Canada, and tell you that a wealth tax is a conservative idea. That doesn't make sense.

HANNITY: It's interesting, because I asked about all those positions.  He goes I was just a businessman throwing out ideas. I said have you talked through them. Now he gave the answer, which was he talked about portability, cross state lines, job to job, et cetera, about health care savings accounts. So it is obvious that he is evolving into a very strong conservative on specific issues.

LOWRY: We'll see.

HANNITY: But some people don't like that. He has five and a half months. He might be able to convert you.

LOWRY: We'll see. We'll see.

HANNITY: Rich Lowry, National Review. William F. Buckley, I could use a few terms that he used with Gore Vidal. Would you like me to mention a few?


LOWRY: That's true.

HANNITY: OK, thank you both.

HURT: You know, Sean, I think it's important, obviously Rich is exactly right. He has changed on a lot of these things, and he should get attacked by the other candidates and let the American voters decide which is more trustworthy and they go with that. Voters are very good at that.

HANNITY: I would say Buckley was even more politically incorrect than Trump, and you know what words I'm thinking about.

LOWRY: In that exchange, yes, you're right. Thanks, Sean.

HANNITY: Coming up, just when you thought Iranian nuclear deal couldn't get any worse, wait until you hear what we learned today.  Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters is coming up next.

Then tonight --


SHERIFF DAVID CLARKE, MILWAUKEE COUNTY: You have criminals, you have black racialists, you have cop haters and anarchists have now formed together this bold movement, if you will.


HANNITY: Sheriff David Clarke called out the Black Lives Matter movement last night on this program. Bo Deitl, Eric Guster, they respond, go head to head, straight ahead.


HANNITY: Welcome back to "Hannity." So the Iranian nuclear deal may actually be worse than we originally imagined. According to the reports, under the disastrous agreement, get this, Iran is going to have access to $150 billion in assets. By the way, based on the size of their economy, that's the equivalent of $8 trillion U.S. dollars coming into this country.  That of course after sanctions are lifted. And the rogue regime in Tehran, get this, within eight years they will be able to buy ballistic missiles, and within five years they can purchase conventional weapons.

Now, Iran is also given the power to delay inspections of a suspected nuclear sight for 24 days under the deal, and unfortunately that's not all.  The AP is now reporting as part of a seek side deal with the United Nations, quote, "Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of developing nuclear arms there."  Seriously? Can you make a worse deal?

Joining us with reaction, Fox News military analyst Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters. Ralph, let me go through this slowly again. We didn't even get four American hostages. They get the equivalent of $8 trillion based on the size of their economy. They get conventional weapons. They continue to spin centrifuges, which will guarantee nuclear weapons. They get 24 days notice of an inspection. They get to pick their own inspectors, no U.S. inspectors. What is wrong with this president? How dumb is he?

LT. COL. RALPH PETERS, FOX NEWS MILITARY ANALYST: Well, he's not dumb. He's just incredibly arrogant and vain and egotistical.

The first problem obviously is the IAEA is not even going to be able to lay hands on or personally inspect the Parchin site, a key, key nuclear develop many site. And the IAEA cannot say, oh, we'll be able to monitor on video. Good luck with that.

The next question, Sean, is what other sites, what other military sites might fall under this protocol? But this is ugly. But there is something even uglier, something vastly more shameful. And that's that President Obama and Secretary Kerry knew about this deal. They had to know, and they did not tell the American people them did not tell congress.  Those two men have been more open with our enemies than the American people.

HANNITY: I say "dumb" because this is really stupid. And I'll tell you why. Because we have pretty much assured that the number one state sponsor of terror that said the destruction of Israel is not negotiable, that was burning U.S. flags and Israeli flags and threatening to wipe Israel off the map during the negotiations, we have given them everything.  Can you tell me one thing we have gotten out of this deal, just name one thing except assuring that our kids will live under the threat of an Iranian radical Islamic regime that wants to kill us with weapons of mass destruction? What do we get?

PETERS: Well, President Obama got his legacy. Unfortunately, it will not be the legacy he wants in the long run.

But in your list of all sins of this awful deal, this wretched deal, you left something out. In the shorter term Iran is going to get a network of four F-300 defense systems. They are strategic systems that make it much harder for the Israelis or for us or anyone to go in and destroy these facilities if they had to be destroyed.

So what this deal does -- everybody is focusing just on the nukes, and that's bad enough. But it also essentially green-lights, it gives a stamp of approval, to Iran's ambitions in the area, its support of terrorism, its aggression. As you noted, it funds that support of terrorism and aggression. It helps them prepare to defend against a future strike. This is so immeasurably bad that only --

HANNITY: So money, nukes, conventional weapons, intercontinental ballistic missiles, they made a deal just today, locked it up the Russians that they'll have a missile defense system if the Israelis decide they need to take things out, take out the nuclear sites, and we can't get four Americans home. We got nothing here.

PETERS: We couldn't get one. We couldn't get American home.

HANNITY: We didn't get anybody. They didn't want to negotiate that.  I don't know. I am scared to death. Colonel, good to see you. Sad.  Thank you.

PETERS: Don't be scared. Be angry.

HANNITY: I'm angry and sad because this is the world we're leaving our kids. Here's the simple formula -- one plus one equals two. A-squared plus B-squared equals C-squared, radical Islamic Mullahs with weapons of mass destruction equal a modern day holocaust. It's not hard to figure out. That's scary.


HANNITY: And I'm angry about it. Yes.

And coming up next tonight right here on "Hannity."


CLARKE: You have criminals, you have black racialists, you have cop haters and anarchists have now formed together this bold movement, if you will.


HANNITY: Sheriff David Clarke calls out the Black Lives Matters movement. Is he right? We'll check in with Bo Dietl and Eric Guster.  They go head to head, and that's next.  


HANNITY: Welcome back to "Hannity." So last night right here on this program, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, he had some very sharp words for the Black Lives Matter movement. Watch this.


CLARKE: Let's take a look at this group, this Black Lives Matter, which I have renamed Black Lies, l-i-e-s, Matter. And the reason I have is because this is the bastard child, as you know, of the "hand's up, don't shoot." The whole thing is built on a lie. The whole premise is built on a lie.

But it's a conglomeration of misfits. You have Occupy movement. You have organized labor in on it now. You have criminals, you have black racialists. You have cop haters and anarchists have now they've formed together this bold movement, if you will.


HANNITY: Here with reaction is former NYPD detective Bo Dietl and criminal defense attorney Eric Guster. Are you enjoying the fact that Bernie Sanders can't even give a speech, and Hillary Clinton is getting attacked by them and has to say, oh, good, I'll only talk to white people?  She actually said that.

ERIC GUSTER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: I'm not enjoying the fact. They have to sit down and talk to different groups, and Black Lives Matter is one of the groups that they have to talk to, talk about certain issues.

HANNITY: Do white lives matter?

GUSTER: Yes, of course.

HANNITY: Do all lives matter?

GUSTER: Yes, they do.

HANNITY: Do blue lives matter? Do police lives matter?

GUSTER: Their focus is black lives for so many centuries, black lives have not mattered in so many ways.

HANNITY: Then why did Governor O'Malley, when he makes a statement "Black lives matter, white lives matter, all lives matter," why would a politician apologize for that?

GUSTER: I don't know. I don't have an answer to that. But the issue is what about black lives?

HANNITY: Of course they matter.

GUSTER: Right, and they do. But they've been ignored for so many years.

BO DIETL, FORMER NYPD DETECTIVE: Take a position here.


DIETL: Here is my vow. All Black Lives Matter? Let's go to Chicago where on 4th of July there were 14 young African Americans are killed, 65 shot over the weekend. What about those black lives? They don't make television.


HANNITY: If we're going to talk about, and let me go to you, Bo, we're going to talk about black lives matter, it's not police that are killing, you know, young, African-American men, black men in America.  Where is most of that crime coming from? It's not the majority I'm talking about.

DIETL: The majority, I believe 92 percent in the years' time there will be over 5,000 mostly African-American youth are going to be killed in our inner cities by other African-Americans. What about those black lives, Eric?


GUSTER: Do you want me to answer?

DIETL: Let me finish now. Here we are.


DIETL: But the problem is this. I band together. I was a detective in Harlem. I picked up kids who were shot dead. Their lives matter.

HANNITY: Wait a minute. Why isn't there more outrage? If there is one high profile case with a police officer, here's my question --

GUSTER: -- I can't answer it.

HANNITY: How come we don't see the same intensity when you have such a high percentage of the crimes happening that way that you describe?

GUSTER: There is a high intensity but there's not media coverage. In Birmingham, Alabama, there are a lot of people who are banding together.

HANNITY: That is not true.

GUSTER: That is true. Yes, it is. It is very true.

HANNITY: I put a whole list of people in Chicago.

GUSTER: There are different groups in St. Louis who are doing things about it. There are groups doing --

HANNITY: I'm not buying it. I'm not buying it.


HANNITY: It doesn't fit the narrative.

DIETL: We have a president that has divided the black community and the white community. We should be getting together. We have got problems in our streets.


DIETL: I don't -- Eric, I don't look at you as black or white. I look at good and bad, Eric. Do you know what? There are a lot of other cops out there the same way.

GUSTER: There are bad apples and that is what people are saying.

DIETL: My point is just saying Black Lives Matter --


HANNITY: All lives matter.

GUSTER: Black lives have been ignored for centuries. That is our argument.


DIETL: Hey, Eric? I just --

HANNITY: Our "Question of the Day" is straight ahead.


HANNITY: Welcome back to "Hannity." All right, time for your input and our "Question of the Day." So which 2016 GOP candidate do you think has the best plan to combat illegal immigration? It's simple. Go to Facebook.com/SeanHannity, on Twitter @SeanHannity, let us know what you think.

Quick programming note, tomorrow night, 10:00 eastern, I've got the night off. Special edition, "Fox News Reporting: Hurricane Katrina: The Storm Of A Lifetime," it has been 10 years. The city is still recovering.  Tomorrow night, 10:00 eastern.

That is all the time we have left for this evening. We hope you'll set your DVR Monday through Friday 10:00 eastern so you never miss an episode. We take attendance, and when you're not here, it makes all of us upset. So please join us. Thanks for being with us. Have a great night.

Content and Programming Copyright 2015 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2015 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.